Sexual Capitalism - A Guide to Man & His Market (Vince Lynch, PUA, Hypnosis Ebook .PDF)

First published 2011 Copyright © Street Hypnosis Limited 2012 (UK Registered: 08220344) All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyrights reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, Photocopying, recording or otherwise), without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Concept, Philosophy, Model and Techniques unless otherwise stated were developed independently and structured accordingly in written form throughout this book by Vince Lynch, of VinceLynch.com Wrote in coffee shops, hotel rooms & airports whilst touring, including; Los Angeles, Melbourne, Barcelona, Amsterdam, San Francisco, Ibiza, Paris, Las Vegas, Nice, New York, Madrid, London, Lisbon etc.

Introduction This book is on pushing persuasion and attraction as far as it can go…. Most persuasion texts focus on techniques that advise use on people who are already somewhat responsive to your message. Rather than building responsiveness. This means that four fifths of the audience is lost. Using their method, we simply cannot convince everyone. After working delivering workshops and seminars on these psychological topics for several years, I came to a response on how to build responsive audiences. Many of us, don’t set out to persuade others. We tend to have the attitude “Live and let live” this mentality is that we do not feel we should actively persuade others according to our desires. They say people should be able to do, think and feel the way they want to. Andrew K. Gulledge (2004) Nevertheless, people are undoubtedly influenced constantly by their surroundings. If you’ve ever communicated anything to anyone, then you’ve probably used persuasion techniques whether you realize it or not. And even if you haven’t communicated, you’ve remained silent, you’ve still communicated something. I’ve spent several years, researching, and socializing with people who make a living off, and genuinely believe that they can convince others to do anything they suggest. Some of them are magicians who want participants to really have faith in the magic they’ve seen, street hypnotists who want to see if they can convince random strangers to hand over their belongings and cash, seducers who really believe they have the ultimate code to making every girl love you.

As a result, of my lifestyle, this book wasn’t wrote in isolation, it was composed while growing up, during which; partying, lecturing, traveling, and researching with those who are regularly citied as the finest hypnotists, magicians, and seducers in the world, with quantities of the book wrote while traveling in Las Vegas, New York, London, LA, Milan, Lisbon, Paris and more. I was every so often asked as a youngster “What are you going to do for a career when you grow up?” I suspect few children say “Hypnotist”, and neither did I. When asked I always responded “I’m a philosopher”. I never set out to turn out to be an expert in social skills. I inquisitively wanted to know whether humans consciously think or not. Whether we really have power over of the decisions we make, or whether it was all pre-determined. Along the way in satisfying this question I found myself surrounded by people who frequently broke the rules of what we consider ‘normal’ social behaviour, which I found fascinating and quickly directed my attention towards. Until recently, improving social skills, particularly to the degree we are referring to, really wasn't relevant to human life. People tended to stick to their local social networks, infrequently meet new people, travel, etc. Today, the average guy, can communicate to thousands of people a second, the internet has truly sparked a revolution (think of the social media and social video giants), and suddenly monopolizing on social sciences suddenly becomes paramount to success. Previously, for most people, hypnosis didn't exist. It was irrelevant and to say in phrase; ‘beside the point’ for their lives. Even though a hypnotist seems to be able to make anyone do

anything… it didn’t really matter because the immediate benefits of how one could use it in their own life wasn’t immediately obvious. The only reason an individual might see hypnosis as a benefit to them, is if they were looking for a second job, or something to do during retirement, and therefore become a hypnotherapist or stage hypnotist. Sure, we’ve seen hypnosis on TV, and the idea of being able to make anyone do anything is miraculous. But people simply don't believe in things that don’t benefit and are unrelated to their lives. This book is an endeavour to revolutionize the way hypnotists accomplish hypnosis, to make their performances more valuable. Then also, to offer a guiding light on how to change the public perception of hypnosis. Let’s ponder what cool, sexy and fashionable looks like. Consider the cultures of snowboarding and surfing. They are sports, that are surrounded by a way of life of an elusive bunch of moneyed young 20-29 year old's with big shoulders who revel in competition and partying in exorbitant locations, yet everyone in the world wants to move to those locations to learn how to snowboard and surf. Their following is massive, and isn’t down necessarily to the thrill of the sport. But a combination of factors that includes, the element of risk, the desirability of the crowd, the dramatic feel of the location, the partying and the competition. For thousands of years philosophers have looked at human act, and questioned what drives and motivates people to commit one

activity over another and how society as a whole can decide what actions are most valuable. Imagine walking in to beach resort, one evening and witnessing a frenzied hoard of ambitious young men, loudly and boytriously make competitive remarks at the TV with crazed excitement. It’s the world championship of hypnosis, where international mind control and seduction artists fly in to test their elite skills on the wealthiest men and the hottest women, with conquests of epic proportions. ….Maybe that's just a dream but since 2003 I have lived that dream in my mind. Many of us grew up believing that to persuade people we had to force them using negative language. We are here to show that fun and having a good time attracts and persuades to a world class standard. There’s plenty of people who’s living depends on persuading others to do and believe what we want, politicians convince us that their idea to produce spending cuts will benefit society, or that the tax they are placing is necessary in order to defend our kingdom. Some sales people claim that they can get any customer to buy anything. Regardless of price, its often stated that 20% of the salesman within a company make up 80% of the sales. Some guys really seem that they can have us what we believe whatever they would like. Con-men seem able to walk away with people's money, and the victims were completely convinced the man was doing them a favour. Typically describing him as seeming so kind, or nice,

magicians do magic tricks on us, where the trick is happening right before our eyes, yet we fail to notice the things that cause the magic to happen. Hypnotists on television seem to be able to convince people who look just like people we know, to dance around believing they are Michael Jackson, or forgetting their own names. What exactly is going on, and what do all these types of influence have in common? Modern research and perspectives amongst various communities have solutions as to how we can become better at how to use social skills to our advantage. We all have things that we would like to sway others of. Perhaps it’s that girl we want to go on a date with us, or to make the job interviewer want to hire us, or an entire populace to feel compelled to purchase from our advertisements as a capitalist. Persuasion, like hypnosis, doesn't work all of the time. There are plenty of instances when persuasion doesn't work. Studies show that you might be able to convince as high as 88% of people to do something, but then what happened to the other 12% of those people, why did they not become convinced, or believe what you suggested? In the past, those interested in these fields, wrote off the failures as 'noise', stating “well you can't get everyone” but that is simply not in line with the modern research perspectives. I’ve watched countless street hypnotist and seducer, move from bar to bar. Seeming to look for that magic social code, which makes people responsive to them. Some months I’ve witnessed hypnotists hypnotize everyone they speak too without a single failure restarting their record for months. Other month’s regular

failures occur as if the “Only 20% of people can be hypnotized” misconception is law. During these months, these hypnotists seem to lack that magic ‘x’ factor. What is that thing that makes us sometimes able to hypnotize everyone and other times we can’t seem to get people engaged to us? The times when subjects are unresponsive to persuaders and hypnotists suggestions, seem unable to concentrate, and seem unemotionally involved in the suggestions the hypnotist seems to offer. There are methods to create attention and direct its path. Those techniques are in this book, and by using them your results will shoot through the roof! By looking to genre’s that are built about creating a ‘cool’ brand, about creating that “ummppphhh” that gives it the power, we can get a sense of what the magic factor is that sometimes makes us completely unstoppable! Everyone in the world has read some kind of book on persuasion or body language, you are working your way up the ladder as part of a worldwide club of Business Leaders, Movie Stars, and everyone who has the belief that by improving their social skills will make them influence. I, the author of this book. Am a hypnotist, I've been fascinated with and taught social skills, since a young age. People often ask, me “Can you make anyone do anything?” I reply “Yes”. They ask “What like a hypnotist?” I say yes. They then ask whether I perform a lot of shows or help people stop smoking or lose weight.

The truth is, the ability to get inside someone else's mind is so truly profound... its value is infinitely greater than either of those two occupations could possibly encompass. After you've read this book, don't be afraid, to email me. Despite huge demand, I always endeavor to reply. I like you, have a massive interest in a fascinating subject. Consider this membership You’re in a very elite club

A Man and His Introduction Do you exist? How do you know define yourself? Where did ‘the you’ come from? Is there an ultimate version of you; a you ++. The writer Clifton Paul Fadiman once wrote; “A sense of humour is the ability to understand a joke - and that the joke is oneself.” Was he simply referring to the fact that something is funny when you realize that it applies to you; that when someone trips and a pie lands in their face you laugh because you imagine the silly-event could easily happen to you. That a mistake or blunder of another, can be interpreted through the self; we laugh because we know we are just as silly. And maybe to be truly entertained for a lifetime requires an understanding of the humorous nature of the self. Sure it’s just a quotation; but we’ve all heard the truism “Life’s a joke”, but what exactly are people who spurt out this phrase referring to.

Maybe they are stating something about how unexpected life can be serving you a dish – or a strange tasting medicine you didn’t expect; perhaps they are referring to some brutal form of irony like life causing you to meet a long lost lover on your wedding day to another woman. What seems certain is that life is unpredictable, everything seems to change; and certain things happen in our lives that force us to reinterpret the very nature of our self – this might make us laugh, cry, sink into a deep depression, cause you panic & paranoia, send you on a mission of revenge, or turn your ego into a fortress. Imagine you’re in a museum of art and you saw a work that was so utterly distinct in its own right, that it puts the other paintings/works into contrast just by its very existence. Bright lights, dark colours, pitches & tones of sound, force us to reinterpret their surroundings – ideas seem to change, mean a different thing; if you go into another culture you quickly realize that nothing accurately translates from a foreign language to your mother tongue; and then you end up wondering what really translates when two people of the same culture and language speak. Under all the chaos of multiple meanings, and senses of the world; we need to make some decisions about how to live our lives; how can we be virtuous. Does our virtue, ethics, morality come from our own internal self-talk; our ability to think consciously to define ourselves? Or is it outside of our control; if morality was outside the realm of absolute free choice, then it would seem it would be possible to change the actions, behaviours, emotions, attitudes, thoughts and morality of others around us.

Perhaps we are trapped inside our own mental prison that causes our self-destruction; that we down to some way that we operate our choices, cause us to be defeated by our adversaries. You might at this point question “Adversaries – I have none?” how you define others comes from your philosophical choices about the self – when you state that you have no adversaries you might be stating that you are so unique and different to everyone else that you aren’t competing with them. Or you might be arguing that you have no adversaries – because you are not against anyone, against anything – replies to this could be numerous; political activist Malcolm X stated “If you don't stand for something you will fall for anything.” we each have either consciously or unconsciously made fundamental philosophical decisions about life; even in this very paragraph I refer to an unconscious – if you don’t know about a part of your consciousness how can you be sure it exists? And how can you be sure that your thoughts are really your own, and not the equivalent of you watching a TV program produced by your brain that advertises thoughts to you? According to Ayn Rand (year, philosophy who needs it) “Most men spend their days struggling to evade three questions, the answers to which underlie man's every thought, feeling and action, whether he is consciously aware of it or not: Where am I? How do I know it? What should I do?” “The men who are not interested in philosophy absorb its principles from the cultural atmosphere around them--from schools, colleges, books, magazines, newspapers, movies, television, etc. Who sets the tone of a culture? A small handful of men: the philosophers.” Rand (1984) in other words man's

values and emotions are determined by his fundamental views of life. One might argue; well I read a great deal of scientific journals so I’m able to decide what I think about human behaviour, by reading recent studies – but what they are ignoring is the method they go about logically inferring a theory from the studies they’ve read, and the theory, reasons for the research, the historical-cultural and academic aspects that inspired the research; then on top of that the authors writing style, and the way he interprets the research were all decided from an underlying philosophy. From this we could hypothesis that in order to make sense of the world we must a) engage with it a lot – i.e. through books, films, debates, etc. and then spend another portion of time analysing what we have learnt and what from this we can truly say we know about ourselves and the world around us; this point is further shown by Nietzsche, he writes ‘To become a thinker; how can anyone become a thinker if he does not spend at least a third of the day without passions, people and books?’ Nietzsche (2000) What we want to know as humans might be “How can we be happy, without harming others, and maybe further how can I help others be happy too?” at least this is the question posed by Jeremy Bentham; the founding father of the philosophical theory of Utilitarianism; he believed that the true goal that humanity should be striving for is personal happiness for its members. Utilitarianism is an exciting theory because it seems to offer such a simple solution as to how to live; - what goals to choose, what to focus on in our lives, we will later go through the flaws of the theory and throughout the course of the book a model of

morality for interacting with others, and what we mean by consciousness should be defined to the best of our ability in light of the central theme of this text. During university I, like all undergraduate students was able to undertake a research project; I investigated the “theoretical perspective that until individuals decide to do something definite in their actually worldly experiences they could be anything, and all these anything’s represent conflicting personality parts and rumination”. That seems like a very wordy sentence; but to state clearly what was of interest is’ how individuals choose their life goals’, and whether individuals who had a kind of process of which goals they select, or at least clearly knew what they want were happier, and more confident than people who weren’t clear about what they want to achieve in the future. Whether “Achievement goals direct the attentional focus of individuals such that situational appraisals and self-related cognitions are framed by the perspective implied by the goal…achievement goals facilitate the control and value appraisals underlying achievement emotions, thereby influencing these emotions.” Elliot (2006) Alternatively “It has been shown that ‘highly abstract goals (e.g. getting to know people) tends to be associated with psychological distress whereas low level strivings (e.g. to speak to more strangers) are linked to greater levels of psychological well-being” Brewer, M., Hewstone, M (2004:174) as stated not all goals seem to cause psychological satisfaction as a result of their pursuit, that it seems as if there needs to be some process of goal selection in order to result in high self-esteem.

"When man is born, the human race as well as the individual, he is thrown out of a situation which was definite, as definite as the instincts, into a situation which is indefinite, uncertain and open." Fromm, E. (2006) Men are crippled by uncertainty or at least that’s the view of various researchers into the psychological field of goal pursuit, but philosophy Ayn Rand relates this back to philosophy. She believes that when we consider a goal or desire; our first question is “Can I achieve it?” she thinks this as a mistake, because the goal or desire will always be unachievable in light of their current abilities. That people are questioning whether they have an innate ability to do the goal they set themselves? Which of course the answer is no, nothing is certain. No great composer suddenly woke up as a child and said “Yes, I’m innately a great composer” or Mozart wouldn’t have thought to himself as a child “tomorrow I’m going to produce the greatest musical works in history” From this we can see that there are doubts to be considered in the hypothesis “goal pursuit alone is enough to result in an integrated personality – and high self-esteem” we don’t deny that in some cases a goal reduces internal conflict as one becomes more focused on an important and meaningful goal, that this gives their life structure and direction and allows one to be able to distinguish which ideas, thoughts, and activities, promote their goal; and how to recognize those that distract. This integrated man sounds perfect. Imagine if you made sense, if all your beliefs, and views about the world perfectly fitted together, perhaps you would have confidence to speak to deliver a lecture on any idea you so choose or was asked to speak on

because you’d be sure that you would be able to go off into endless interlocking stories about the concept in question and how it relates to other important topics of existence. Ayn Rand defines this integrated being further by stating “because he has no intellectual contradiction, then he has no inner conflict”, “he has no change in him, he is indivisible, he is perfect” Rand, A. et al (2009) She continues “In order for a person’s countless daily decisions on myriad issues to work together to advance his best interest, they must be made on a coordinated, rational basis. Rand, A. Smith, T. (2007) like as we pointed out earlier scientific studies only make sense when read by a reader who has some means of interpreting, and inducing cultural implications from it, likewise the same goes for the self the opportunities you consider whether to accept them as goals (& desires) can only be interpreted, logically selected from an underlying philosophy of self – an epistemology. Where are you? Why are you here? What are you supposed to do with your life? Which goals are important? How are you going to kick ass over ideas? Voltaire famously said “The more I read, the more I meditate; and the more I acquire, the more I am enabled to affirm that I know nothing” Nietzsche said “Better know nothing than know many half-truths” Socrates answers are problems of how what we can be sure of – giving ourselves some integrity and security in our own ego he stated “The only true wisdom is knowing you know nothing… “ he continues by stating the an answer to becoming smarter than any other man, he states; “In knowing that you know nothing, makes you the smartest of all”.

Once upon a time a man called Chairephon consulted the great Delphic oracle, Chairephon asked “Who is the wisest man alive” the Delphic Oracle replied “There is no one alive more wise that Socrates”. Robert William Jordan (1990) When Cairephon told Socrates that the Oracle predicts that he is the wisest man alive, he refuted the claim, saying that the Oracle must be mistaken. “So he set out to meet someone wiser than himself. He consulted widely, but came to the conclusion that there was a sense in which he was wiser than those he talked to; because unlike them he was aware that he knew nothing” Socrates didn’t seem to have a particular message to propagate; although Plato was keen to find the ultimate source of knowledge, to properly define things for what they are through discourse. Socrates goal seemed somewhat different; as commented by Robinson “Socrates was certainly a unique moralist, he hoped to make men more virtuous by logic” Robinson, R. (1953) The key to his philosophical debate “Socrates like Descartes, believes in the value of a method in philosophy and in the value of a method of doubt” Robinson, R. (1953: 63) Descartes shows his method of doubting in order to disclosure true knowledge through the following statements; “I suppose therefore that all things I see are false; I persuade myself that none of those things ever existed that my deceptive memory represents to me; I suppose I have no senses; I believe that a body, figure, extension, movement and place are only fictions of my mind. Then what can be considered true” Descartes, R. (1996: 79)

We each have a sense of existing. The philosophy Descartes famously proclaimed “I think therefore I exist” he made this statement because he wanted to show that we are not dreaming, we are not inside a computer program, or robots that believe we ought to exist because we see the world – for example a camcorder sees the world but we wouldn’t say a camcorder is a person. Throughout the ages it’s been debated where ideas come from? The philosophers Plato and Socrates seemed to believe in another universe of ideas from which we are born into when we are born in this world – where we innately know mathematics, the nature of things, perhaps abstract concepts, that all of us are born with art, culture, philosophy before we even witness any input through our senses. Plato believed our senses were fallible; it’s never truly clear whether Socrates believed this as all of the accounts of what Socrates believed came through the writings of Plato about the discussions they had. He states that the objects of the senses; i.e. the way we view the world through our senses, is forever changing; that we don’t truly see things as they are; that I don’t have a true sense of the colour blue through my vision, or truly understand the call of a bird. That I constantly see the colour blue differently and the call of the bird is forever changing through my ability to hear. Plato says “I said, let me show in a figure how far our nature is enlightened or un-enlighted: Behold! Human beings living in an underground den/a cave” “They have an inability to move as they are chained to the wall” Plato continues “and they see only their own shadows or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave”

Plato says “To them, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images” Plato (360 B.C.E ) This claim might sound ridiculous to untrained ears; but that’s the very point in itself isn’t it – through training your ears will change? Or is it through training the way you hear changes? Or is it the idea of the statement that is miscommunicated from its true source. How can we truly know what the bird sounds like; because to one listener they might hear a broader range of pitches, of squeaks and squawks than we as a listener are capable of retrieving. “The beginning of science is the recognition that the simplest phenomena of ordinary life raise quite serious problems: Why are they as they are, instead of some different way?” Chomsky, N. (1987) For example; consider a cup of coffee, not only does every cup of coffee taste different, the feelings created by the coffee are never the same, it looks different in every different light etc. the differences between two cups of coffee are so great, that they actually contradict one another beyond the point of repair, it’s hard to see any remote similarity between the two cups of coffee. This problem is even greater when you consider each sip from a single cup of coffee, every bit of taste, changing, and the caffeine in your brain changing impact moment to moment. Plato believes that there must be a world of coffee’s; that our ability to know what a coffee is, doesn’t come from the empirical world – reality as we see it through our senses; but instead from an esoteric world that we can barely remember, where the true form of the coffee existed in the way it’s supposed to be, the way it truly is, the way we want to know it to be – and the only way we can even get close to understanding the nature of the form of

a coffee, is by investigating our innate knowledge about coffee’s; through this dialogue with ourselves or shared with another philosopher we can acquire the knowledge of a coffee. For this reason he believes we gain no knowledge through our senses, and for that reason knowledge must be innate – already within us, and these models and templates for ideas allow us to recognize an idea we witness through our senses in a form truer than the one our senses actually perceives. Plato wrote that one cannot truly understand the beauty and logic philosophy of the ideas expressed between him and Socrates through reading the dialogues he wrote, because the writing and the reading take away the true meaning. Once again showing that the true ideas can only be contained within the mind, and therefore can only must exist in the mind before witnessing the world. “Seeking the universal” i.e. finding rules and defining the true nature of ideas, i.e. stating a definition of the meaning of things became the focus on the attention for Plato and Socrates; discussing what constitutes a particular thing; finding the violations to the rule to test the principle as a way of discovering what remains of the thing after philosophical attack. Plato took this approach to believe that there must be “a world of ideas where they exist in their universal sense” since there are no common definition of the sense of an object to be acquired through our senses, that these ideas these forms can only be understood through participating in deducing them; through reason. Seddon, F. (2008) You can see that although Plato’s point is dogmatic he definitely has somewhat of an argument. The reality is; as Descartes says “I

think therefore I exist” that our ability to think and reason is interconnected with our existence. Our very ability to make such a statement ‘I think therefore I exist’ constitutes an identity. We do exist, the way Descartes came to believe that we can trust ideas through our senses was to claim “I conceive of a God, this is easy for me to conceive its part of my being it was always there, it must be within me from the moment I came to exist, and therefore is part of my existence; there is a God” and then to say “A God who brought me into existence, wouldn’t deceive me through my senses” that his senses must be accurate because there is a God who wouldn’t see point in misleading Descartes if he showed the very kindness to bring Descartes into existence in the first place. Descartes is mistaken about ideas being acquired through our senses and their accuracy, as already shown through the coffee example. The problem of what function our eyes and ears serve would later be solved by Darwin, showing that our senses exist because of survival amongst all kinds of processes that cause the destruction of billions of facets of humanity, while some maintain and survive through our innateness passed along through reproduction. That in a way our senses exist because its practical for them to exist in the way they do, and that our particular opportunities and threats over the discourse of recent history has for whatever reason allowed us to become the most powerful species above nature on the earth in its existence. The question is; how do our senses inform us? Aristotle the student of Plato disagreed with the world of forms; our innate ability to understand the true nature of an idea. Aristotle

definitely believed that the true nature of an idea could be discovered. But he believed that we are only born with an innate ability to reason, to logically induce from our environment; he didn’t deny that objects acquired through our senses lack consistency, that they change depending on when, how, and other things about the way they were witnessed and by whom, he believed that from our witnessing we could take note, and logically realize what the idea was attempting to represent using our underlying sense of logic and reason. The same way a baby learns about the world as it witnesses and interacts with it; that a baby can logically induce an idea from its presence in the real world “worms taste bad” Aristotle set up a school of philosophy; where persons could learn to debate and discuss the meaning of things like Plato and Socrates did; because Aristotle believed like Socrates and Plato did that it’s this underlying ability to use the logical arguments, understand the logical fallacies, and contradictions amongst things that allow you define the thing. In other words; he believed without a foundation and constant application of (in) philosophical understanding you couldn’t understand the nature of an object regardless of how many times you witness it. That the acquisition of knowledge requires two things the real world – witnessed through our senses; and a foundation in philosophical understanding of reason, of logic, of statistics, of contradiction, and our innate ability to be stimulated by and categorize information.

“Aristotle understands a man to be; one that looks almost scientifically at reality, gathers information, isolates and classifies phenomena, detects similarities, discerns patterns and regularity and obtains essences from which concepts and laws are constructed; that people use inductive logic to create a world.” Younkins ,E. (2005: 23) Aristotle believed that all objects that we witness in the world – are attempting to reach the status of platonic ideas – not that platonic ideas of things genuinely exist outside the realm of empiricism but in the mind. But that an objects true sense of self is to express the platonic-ness. But this can only be done through people minds. So all objects, including cups of coffee – want to be their true form, they have a sense of being that is platonic, but can be discovered through discourse of their different states witnessed through the senses. We like objects need to actualize our essence – achieve our higher state of being; for this reason Aristotle dedicated a great portion of philosophic writings to Virtue – how to be a man of good, and he wrote about the structure of story, of Greek Mythology to construct the ideas of the virtuous man – the hero, and Greek Tragedies like Achilles heel. This is a story about a man who was the most handsome of all Men, he assembled an army against a large fortress called ‘troy’; he was completely indestructible; perfect, all but his heel. His heel, i.e. the fatty bottom bit of the foot at the back that usually rests on the floor; when injured would be enough to prevent him moving adequately enough to protect himself, and if injured in battle would lead to his fall from grace. An Achilles heel is a weakness that someone has in their philosophical underpinnings; in their virtue, the nature of their soul.

That the heel is to represent some part of his mind, a weakness of character that will eventually lead to one’s downfall, it’s not the injury by an opponent that leads to the death of Achilles philosophically speaking. Achilles while he was an infant his mother was approached by an Oracle who informed that Achilles would be killed in battle by an arrow to his foot. This part of the story is to indicate that the character flaw was there from his beginnings as an infant; that its intertwined with her very nature – and hence predictable; as foreseen by the Oracle. Despite his mother’s best attempts to make him strong, powerful, and a great man… wasn’t enough to make him a virtuous man – and thus his death and his life were intertwined. Of course it’s only a story; but there is some truth in it; your goals that you aspire towards should integrate with your unique opportunities and underlying philosophy – to use your perfectly aligned and integrated self as an indestructible force to face the world. Absolute power is consequence to having an absolute soul. Ayn Rand continues to explain “Reason, is not merely a distinguishing attribute of man; it is his fundamental attribute— his basic means of survival. Therefore, whatever reason requires in order to function is a necessity of human life.” Rand, A. (1971) Aristotle deduces that an object can only actualize its ultimate form – when it achieves an identity of formal and final causation. That a man should use his logic, his reason, his ability to force the world into his directly as a means to achieving the ultimate end – his own perfection. That a man should only choose the activities, and reject that rest that are focused on his distinct qualities; his goals; but these opportunities can only be

recognized by using his innate ability to reason and focusing on the self. The Ancient Greek world of ethics, of virtual doesn’t necessarily endorse egoism, i.e. selfishly throwing your weight around the world – defeating your opponents, outsmarting everyone around you, taking what you want regardless of cost to anyone else. But it definitely does not endorse altruism – helping your fellow man for their own gain – this in itself does not serve the ultimate goal of perfection of form. That enlightenment can only be achieved by discovering true knowledge, of the self. “You can’t cheat an honest man. He has to have Larceny in his heart in the first place” W. C. Fields John Stuart Mill believes that by us interacting with objects, and gaining ideas about them through our senses; allows knowledge acquisition, he explains “The external cause to which we ascribe our sensations is like – when I see and touch a piece of Gold, I am conscious of a sensation of yellow colour, and sensations of hardness and weight; and by varying the mode of handling, I may add to these sensations many others completely distinct from them. The sensations are all conscious but I consider them as produced by something not only existing independently of my will, but external to my body and mind.” He explains that when we think back of the gold and all these ideas come to mind at the same time that Locke and Hartley dubbed this ‘sensation’ of remembering, the experience of a complex idea. For the purposes of this book we are attempting to ground the philosophical undertones of the text before we continue to understand the underpinnings of an idea.

The philosophy of acquiring ‘ideas’ is known as a theory of learning; how can we learn anything? Because we seem to be reliant on the external world to begin our quest for the source of a true idea – we are going to assume that the external world does exist and that there are other objects that exist and are within this world. We’ve discussed two different versions of knowledge acquisition; and we’ve touched upon more. It should be noted that not all thinkers believe knowledge can be achieved whatsoever; in fact it’s quite in fashion amongst the general public to say that ‘we can’t be truly sure of anything’. What we are alluding to saying is that; because the knowledge of an idea can only be acquired through the senses; then if “we think therefore we exist” we must also perceive information from an outside source. Although this doesn’t solve the issue of whether we are inside the matrix or not is irrelevant because the concept of other objects – other things that exist – can be show to be true. At least the idea of other things that we can perceive and learn more about do exist that we perceive through our senses. We’ve purposely come to this conclusion not to reject the physical world – not only because it seems self-evident, but also because Aristotle’s description of learning from interacting with the world raises some further philosophical implications that provide further dialogue into understanding ourselves. When it’s said that an individual learns about ideas through intentionally interacting with objects and logically analysing them using his sense of reason then it’s said to be the philosophy of intentionality.

Intentionality is the theory proposes that we interact with the environment around us, to learn about the nature of things; and ourselves. A question of the above is whether our thoughts represent something that actually exists in reality. Can we for example imagine things that don’t actually exist, for example “A unicorn” is an object that doesn’t exist in real life that we can think about. Intentionality on the whole answers “no, certainly not!”. – That mental states are directed about objects or states of affairs. “If, for example, I have a belief, it must be a belief that such and such is the case; if I have a fear, it must be a fear of something or that something will occur; if I have a desire, it must be a desire to do something or that something should happen or be the case; if I have an intentional it must be to do something” John R. Searle: (1983:1) John Stuart Mill writes “If you call virtue an entity, you are … suspected of believing it to be a substance … . Every word which was originally intended to connote mere existence, seems, after a time, to enlarge its connotation to separate existence” Mill, J. (1843) In other words he is saying that we can only perceive things that certainly exist – these objects. The immediate criticism comes to mind that “well I can perceive the idea of a Unicorn, but Unicorns certainly don’t exist” however John Stuart Mill and other philosophers like him and a response for such a criticism. Their reply is that; that we slowly begin separately qualities from objects, as if they can be separated. Similarly to the coffee example we began our debate with, stating that two coffee’s which for all intents and purposes in life seem identical but do

not in fact bare any resemblance to one another. That we cannot logically separate attributes of a object – another thing that certainly exists, from the thing itself. Even though we can’t logically separate attributes from things, it’s a human mistake of language which we all carry out. To put simply; when we invent a unicorn we take the horn of another animal, like a rhino, or a horn like shape, and place it on the head of a horse; and then call it a new thing, but really its attributes have no real character; not like the character of millions of years of evolution; they represent a silly human whim; which then critics claim is a completely new beast; but really is just a horse with a horn glued to its nose. He states “Attributes are gradually deprived from the source of their existence; as if they could live independent of it,” which based on the thought of Aristotle, Socrates and Plato in the sense of ‘forms’ they believe that the attribute could certainly not live independently on the objects existence – the attribute is contained within the very nature of the form. He continues “An attribute, say the school logicians; must be the attribute of something; goodness must be the goodness of something; and if this something should cease to exist, or should cease to be connected with the attribute, the existence of the attribute will also be at an end.” Mill, J. (1843: 36) John Stuart Mill believes it’s a construct of language, of people trying to describe things that causes us to detach attributes from the objects they belong to. He states that scientists and philosophers think they are sought of clever, and thus are addicted to taking valuable words and using them inaccurately to describe another thing – which they don’t logically serve. Mill, J. (1843: 31)

Chomsky introduces the terms “I-language” to illustrate his thesis that language is about the intention to relate the social or the external world to the self. That all conversations with anyone or with the self are about something you either desire, or want to avoid – that the very nature of a thought – is the desire to move towards or away from a thing; that all learning is done through the self. Chomsky, N. (2000) What he means to say is, even when we speak of the planet Jupiter. We are expressing ‘I-language’ that somehow the planet Jupiter and the way we are speaking about it relates to the self; it’s a way of our ego interacting with the world – expressing our intentions about the state of things. Likewise to Noam Chomsky; John Stuart Mill believes that all volitions or acts of the will – consist of the idea of objects and their interaction with the self – in the past, future and present. That whenever we think we are considering the usefulness of objects to further ourselves to gain higher utility – that we constantly think of further ways to become more happy – to further our development. According to Noam Chomsky, John Stuart Mill and others – on object-subject relations; we treat objects as if they exist, but also as if they are separated from us. But yet we act as if they have their own life force, their own sense of ‘being’. That when we speak of other things such as inanimate objects, we relate to them as if they are like ourselves – contain a soul, an ability to think, be happy and so on. You might notice a child playing with a toy cuddly bear, and stating that the bear feels happy when he is in a certain part of the house, and needs looking after, and speaking to several times

a day – it seems a natural human trait to assume other objects have an ability to think and feel, and have access to a soul. Freud referenced to this as projection, or transference but as a whole it underpinned his whole theory of unconscious energy and its sources. John Stuart Mill stated that objects exist within their own sense of unity; and Plato referred to objects having an ultimate form; to quote the TV science fiction humour show Red Dwarf “If there’s no heaven for calculators, then where do all the calculators go?” Of course when we speak of objects and their ‘being’ we might not be referring to something equivalent to a thought but with regards to a tree growing its roots through the soil we might say that its exercising a form of volition over nature; that the tree has characteristics unique to its own nature, and this sense of unique being can refer to inanimate objects such as cups of coffee’s or rocks. That when we describe a Coffee or a Rock, we are just describing them by comparing them against things – we are not really talking about their individual unique nature, Erich Fromm believes that when we make assumptions about what something is or isn’t, how it’s like or unlike, another thing we are only referring to the appearance of the thing. Not its essence, its being Fromm, E. (1976:20 ) In order to show that there is some consensus that – objects (such as ideas & other people) are understood only through the self – and that the ego itself is an object separate from the soul - we should explore the works of Freud – on object relations – how we come to understand the external world – and Piaget – how we learn to assimilate language – how we identify with external objects and then internalize them into the self. How does this

process of identifying with others – such as parental figures – allow us to internalize the knowledge we acquire through interaction with them – for example the ability to learn language, are we born with the tools to learn a language or do we learn language through interacting with others? We are about to cover another story, like the earlier one about Achilles from one of the great Greek poets Sophocles (495 B.C. 405 B.C.) who worked during a similar time to; Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Aristotle wrote several texts on how stories, plays etc. of Greek tragedy’s should be constructed. Because his study of morality – and the development of the virtues allowed him to realize the important character traits that develop as one comes to realize of their own existence. One of the stories that were used to highlight core elements of Freudian Theory – of how we come to view ourselves as separate from other objects around us – and therefore as a result become conscious of our ability to move amongst those objects – is the Greek Tragedy of King Oedipus. The myth of Oedipus has been continuously interpreted and retold since the first written version appeared in Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex; It is perhaps the “first detective story of Western literature” Segal, C (1993:12). But the murder mystery is gradually replaced by a search for Oedipus’ identity. “The action of the play consists in nothing other than the process of revealing…, a process that can be likened to the work of psychoanalysis” (Freud SE 2:295). The question motivating the play—who am I?—… how did I learn myself… is, in a nutshell, the question of psychoanalysis. Carel, H (2006) “This way of telling the story shifts the emphasis from the events themselves to the psychological process of discovery, as Oedipus gradually

unravels their true significance. This recasts the myth as a story of a man in search of himself, an enigma whose circular trajectory leads back to the questioner.” That the story begs the question to the audience “Who am I?” making them question their own lives. Carel, H (2006) Once upon a time there was a child called Oedipus; he heard of the Delphic Oracle’s Prophecy of him; which was that “one day you will kill your father and marry your mother” in order to protect his beloved parents from this harm that he is prophesized to bring upon them he travels far away from home. When he arrived at the city of Thebes he is asked a riddle he was asked by The Sphinx, which is a creature that has the haunches of a lion, the wings of a great bird, and the face of a woman that guarded the city – The question asked was asked to all travellers it is that which is a physical representation of a higher deity “Which creature walks on four legs in the morning, two legs in the afternoon, and three legs in the evening?" those who cannot answer her riddle are to have some form of doomed fate. Oedipus answered “Man” and thus had seemingly averted ill fate – by many, for this he was applauded as clever for solving the riddle which was a factor in him eventually becoming king. When Oedipus is asked how he managed to solve the riddle of the sphinx – with his audience expecting him to attribute it to the God’s or some divine influence – and ability to interpret these signs from the Gods; he instead he attributed it to his own intellect. “I stopped the Sphinx! With no help from the birds the signs of the God’s, the flight of my intelligence hit the mark” (Oedipus the King, ll. 445-53) Oedipus believed himself a rational self-sufficient man; and therefore treats all things he encounters with this same rational thinking throughout the story

– he solves the problem of the rule of his city as King using rational means. When Oedipus became King, despite his best efforts the city began falling into ruin – there were prophets who were saying that the city was in ruin because of a curse. “Before this land was a state – it was sovereign of Laius” he was murdered, “he fell, and now the God’s command is plain, punish his takers, whoever they may be” The curse was because a former King Laius was murdered – and it is foretold that the land would not thrive again until the murderer is discovered. He was murdered while travelling abroad to the Delphic, Oedipus complains about the difficulty of bringing his murderers to justice – but Creon states “in this land, said the god; “He who seeks will find; he who sits with folded hands or sleeps is blind”. Sophocles (429 BCE: II 280) King Oedipus took this rumour seriously and set out to discover the killer of King Laius; he states “Now my curse on the murderer. Whoever he is, a lone man unknown in his crime or one among many, let that man drag out his life in agony, step by painful step…” Sophocles (429 BCE: II 280) He begins to honour his word by interviewing various witnesses; one witness he interviewed was the Blind Prophet Teiresias. To which he says “You with your precious eyes, you’re blind to the corruption of your life, to the house you live in, in those you live with- who are your parents? Do you know?” He concludes “Revealed at last, brother and father both to the children he embraces, to his mother son and husband both- he sowed the loins his father sowed, he spilled his father’s blood.” Sophocles (429 BCE: 1313)

What the Prophet had to say about the death of King Laius was disturbing because he claimed that King Oedipus himself was the killer – which of course seems irrelevant to him becoming King, because Oedipus became King naturally because of his great intellect and that the city needed a leader. Oedipus was concerned by the claims of the man – but typically had taken Prophets Predictions seriously. From the moment he is told that its prophesized that he is the killer of King Laius till the end of the story King Oedipus life seems to fall in a negative way. He tells his wife how he has been not himself since he heard the claims of the prophet. His wife says that he shouldn’t concern himself about the predictions of prophets – as when she was married to the former King Laius they constantly had the consultation of prophets and she cited that they were frequently wrong – she mentions that once her and the former king were told that their son would end up murdering Laius, and sleeping with her; in the future so they had the infant put to death in order to prevent him killing Laius – however she reckoned that this was a mistake because despite their efforts King Laius was murdered anyway – presumably by another man. Despite his wife’s best attempts to calm Oedipus down – he instead became more focused on discovering the answer to various questions he had – so he consulted people from the town he grew up in about his own childhood. He discovered that he was adopted as he was abandoned as an infant – and so sought to seek out his biological parents. One of the concerning elements in Oedipus’s mind is about an argument he once had with a man who he passed in the road while both him and the man on carriages. They argued about

who had right of way, and when it seemed as if Oedipus was about to have a sword drew on him by the man he quickly knocked the man off of the carriage, which he fell to the floor and as a result died. While Oedipus is making these discoveries into his own preadolescent years his wife suddenly has a moment of insight. Suddenly everything in her mind clicks into place; that she is Oedipus’s mother – that Laius was his father; and that Oedipus is now her husband. The thought of this knowledge destroys her, and she commits suicide – Oedipus arrives back from his travels and suddenly realizes what his wife had discovered – and that he killed his own father. We will attempt to explain the story and how it’s a metaphor – at least to Freud and Aristotle (in the sense of the fatal flaw) of the development of the self – and the nature of a virtuous man. Sophocles. Meyer, M. (2005) “Sophocles tells the story from the point of view of a son looking for his origins, and his discovery becomes “the tragedy of self-knowledge,” Rudnytsky, P. (1987:256) What is the main question throughout the story of ‘Oedipus the King’; at least viewed in the eyes of Aristotle’s interpretation is what are the moral implications for a Man, what actions does a man take that are right? And how should a man know what to do. Later on in History Sigmund Freud (like others) believed our fate around us, becomes internalised inside of us – as an unconscious. That we have an internal conflict from our desires in the world, and the problems that get in our way; but we might be unaware of the cause of those desires, or the distress we feel in our lives that blinds us from seeing the truth. Freud believed

the Oedipus complex acted as an important method to illustrate his central theory. That if we could only accept our internally distressing feelings – desire of our absolute form – then we would no longer be unaware of the feelings that control us. Freud’s theory of development is essentially; how a man comes to recognize himself, his ego – as he comes to face the world. Why does just a story really tell us anything about philosophy of being a man, isn’t it just a story? Aristotle argues not, he states “Poetry is philosophy… it teaches his explicit laws of the universal, it makes you wonder that if you were in the same line of circumstances, would you make the same choices” it’s for this reason he states that tragedies are told using real characters who lived in history. That is to say that Aristotle believes that stories reveal something very fundamental about the nature of the self; he like Plato & Socrates don’t believe a man to be his true form of self. That he lacks unity, he is divided and full of internal conflict; but for the purposes of good story telling a perfect man or hero isn’t required, he says “unity of plot does not mean unity of the hero” what he means to say here is that ‘a unity of plot’ is that the story is believable – to the extent where you would be able to see similarities in your own life decisions; that given the same problems you’d act in a similar manner to the main character in question, and thus would face the same fate. In the case of Oedipus many thinkers (CARE: 180) have claimed it would be impossible that the characters of the story couldn’t have logically come to the final conclusion. This feeling of ‘on the verge of consciousness‘ is thought to have been purposely designed into the story.

If you remember the blind prophet in the story, he said “Oedipus you despite having eyes, the intelligence to defeat the riddle of the Sphinx – that you’re blind to the truth that surrounds you”, this leads us to see that the real tragedy lies in the success of Oedipus – having the cleverness to solve the riddle of the Sphinx but yet failure to understand the most basic of all riddles “Who am I?” and so his ruin. According to interpretations such as Freud’s; it is Oedipus’s fault that he was morally in the wrong by his actions, because unconsciously he knew exactly what he was doing. Those who recognize the components of the story as unconscious might believe that because Oedipus failed to recognize his own character as a ‘whole’ and instead just focusing on a single part of his identity ‘his cleverness’ shows how he misunderstood himself, and became the source of his own ruin. In this case; the story of Oedipus is to make one question his very nature that defines his choices. Aristotle states “The structural union of parts in the story should be that, if any one of them is displaced or removed, the whole story will be disjointed and disturbed” as covered Aristotle believes that life has a kind of truth to itself; a way that it plays out, and that this life is reflected in the characters, as well as in their circumstances. Let’s begin to explain Freud’s theory of how we come to recognize external objects in the world – and how they come to define our character; this goes under various titles such as ‘Freud’s Stages of Psychosexual Development’, ‘On Narcissism’, ‘Ego’ but the meaning is roughly the same. We shall show some of Freud’s ideas in a similar order to the structure of the story; like how versions of Oedipus begins with a question defining the life of a Man “What walks on four legs in

the sunrise, two legs at noon, and three at sunset?” and the answer being told to avert death (at least for a while) we shall also do the same by explaining the chronological order of the development of the self – according to Freudian theory. When a baby is in the womb, Freud Believes that it doesn’t want for anything, it has everything it needs, the external world and its needs – to carry on existing are equal to; they are connected; they are the same thing, the baby absolutely exists of itself; it is a means to its own end. “He (oneself as a foetus) must get from his existence the impression that he is omnipotent. For what is omnipotence but the feeling that one has all that one wans, and that one has nothing left to wish for. The foetus, however, could maintain this of itself, for it always has what is necessary for the satisfaction of its instincts, and so has nothing to wish for; it is without wants (p.219)... the first wish-impulse of the child, therefore cannot be any other than to regain this situation Horner, T. (1985: 219-222) The instant the baby is born, everything changes - suddenly it requires food, warmth, etc. – from this moment onwards until it ceases to exist the things it requires aren’t totally within its own self, they are now external to itself, that it feels this distress of separation (the subject-object divide) from the very things it needs to continue its existence – that its existence is now dependent on things it cannot control. The baby expresses “I want” in order to get what it needs to avoid distress – and for a while the baby wouldn’t notice; as Freud believes that mothers and babies are in harmony in the first initial months; whereby the mother anticipates her baby’s needs and serves them so effectively that the baby doesn’t experience extreme distress.

Freud arrived to the view that the infant's recognition of the object world is prompted by the rise of unavoidable experiences of pain (frustration) - the libido drives creating the motivation and the child’s need from objects in the world to satisfy those drives - through the external world becomes an extension of the self - which can be understood to be 'through the self' in this way "Freud’s theory of reality - want, thoughts, language, and judgment pivoted in large part upon this conception of early psychic life. That our frustrations (wants) highlight the differentiation between the self and the non-self" Horner, T. (1985) Later the baby learns to communicate basic “I want” expressions to the mother by repeating back her language; that the baby somehow sees the mother as a reflection or contained within its own wants or desires, that the mother exists to serve itself – she is part of its existence. Eventually the “clash between the child's will and that of the mother leads the child to recognize the limits of his will, his wishes, his fantasies about himself, and thus the boundaries of the self are narrowed and set up " Horner, T. (1985:139) One of the founders of Educational Psychology Piaget states; "... that the child begins by confusing his self and the world - that is to say in this particular case his subjective point of view and the external data - and only later distinguishes his own personal point of view from other possible points of view. In fact the child always begins by regarding his own point of view as absolute Horner, T. (1985: 126) Piaget goes onto explain object relations works. He states “if… the human being possesses a mental life when in the womb, although only an unconscious one - and it would be foolish to

believe that the mind begins to function only at the moment of birth” what he is saying is that objects and their separateness from us, their threat or opportunity to our fate, for our inability to control them absolutely. This external-ness of fate eventually delivers us the impression of a self-separate of the external world. That we initially believe we are omnipotent and the world only exists to serve our end, to allow us to further our existence. “One may say without exaggeration that the self is fashioned from the atrophied remains of magic omnipotence... this original of the self its linkage with magic omnipotence, will never be completely eradicated and can be traced even in the adult. Reality testing blocks the road of return to the omnipotent origin of the self (p.139)” Horner, T. (1985: 139) As the child becomes older (age 4+ according to; object relations theorists) he has rules and judgements about how to live in the world, he builds friendships, and engages in activities which receive reward, as oppose to punishment, or the activity is rewarding in itself i.e. if he receives gifts from the friend then he is considered a friend, but if there are no gifts then there is no friendship. It’s at this age “the child values friendships (objects) insofar as they are need-gratifying or invests emotionally in moral rules only to avoid punishment or to receive praise." Westen, D. Klepser, J. Ruffins, S. Lifton, et al (1991) After the child reaches a certain age (6yrs+); these thoughts need to become internalised to communicate – as prior to this the child may find it difficult to say anything other than exactly what his desires are, as he enters this stage of ‘internalisation’ he begins hiding his thoughts for fear of others (such as parents)

knowing his thoughts, this allows him to plan, scheme, etc. he uses his sense of omnipotence to take back what was taken from his “his absolute self” the self he realized when in the womb. This ‘taking back’ the mother (also known as ‘The Oedipus Complex’ in Freudian theory) from the child’s responsibilities as an older child (6yrs – 10yrs) concepts about being a man as identified from the father. Means that the child will attempt to destroy to father in order to win back the affections of the mother – which the child wants to destroy his adult self - himself and the father, in order to return to his infantile state. As an infantile state – the infant has a perfect form of narcissism – it’s the absolute version of it; and it provides content for a perfect ideal of self; with absolute gratification. It cannot be prevented, the food in the fridge even if plentiful will decay and need to be replaced, and there may be requirement to go to work to earn money to pay for warmth in the household, narcissism means ‘self-admiration’ and we all are born with the perfect example of that ‘self-contemplation’ “unlike those kinds of pleasure that depend on an external object, ‘self-love’ is always open to us.” Langford, P. (1995: 15) In the story of King Oedipus; he killed his father in order to become King of his mother; to control her (and his land) absolutely with the power of a King. And throughout the entire time denying his knowledge of this being the case, or his intention to make this occur – to purposely kill the King in order to become his absolute self. Freud believed this Narcissism existed within all of us, and like Oedipus we deny it – but as long as we deny it we will not have a true understanding of our subconscious; and therefore as a result we are affected by its fate.

Erich Fromm states “Freud’s essential principle is to look upon man as an entity, a closed system endowed by nature with certain physiologically conditioned drives, and to interpret the development of his character as a reaction to satisfactions and frustrations of these drives; whereas, in our opinion, the fundamental approach to human personality is the understanding of man’s relation to the world, to others, to nature, and to himself. We believe that man is primarily a social being and not, as Freud assumes, primarily self-sufficient and only secondarily in need of others in order to satisfy his instinctual needs.” Fromm, E. (1942) According to Fromm; even though the instinctive motivation inside of us – our libido – our life force, our energy, is a biological one – it’s highly modifiable. He believes it’s the role of social psychology to explain how these surrounding shared social relevant, psychic attitudes, of the individual with reference to their unconscious development from the family unit’s interaction with the surrounding social-economic environment. What we’ve shown here is how object-subject relations has been built into two different theories of child development; and that the philosophy of Aristotle has been taken seriously as a way of the self-relating to the world in the 20th century. Although we don’t support the work of Freud to be an accurate portrayal of the structure of the personality, what we do conclude is that object relations is an important branch from the philosophy of knowledge into philosophy of mind – and eventually “the science of psychology”. That objective objects are seen as external only because of our frustration to have them work for our wishes. According to

Piaget it’s not that we desire anything outside of the self, he continues “We don’t desire other objects. We intrinsically value them because we need them to satisfy our drives“ Fromm, E. (1942:34) For this reason; we internalize illusions of sense, language, point of view, values of others, etc. in order to consume the objective world into the subjective so once again we will contain all we need as necessary to support our own omnipotence – we are value consumers. We turn objective ideas, into subjective ideas and mistake these as part of the nature of our soul. All thoughts are prey to perceptual confuses between objective and subjective, between the real and the ostensible; it values the entire content of consciousness on a single plane in which ostensible realities and the unconscious interventions of the self are inextricable mixed Horner, T. (1985:34) The theory of object relations that we’ve been covering shows that “interpersonal behaviour and cognitive and affective processes mediate the way we relate to others”. That we are some version of Freud’s Narcissist self or Piaget’s Egocentric self. That we once had a belief that we could make the world around us exactly how we saw fit, and choose our own destiny. Piaget comments we as children “ignore the existence of the self's impact on perceptions and thought, disregards the relativity of one's own perspective, and thus takes the subject's point of view as immediately real and absolute". Achtenberg, D. (2002:38) Brentano believes that this ‘thinking of other things’ as related to us – this ego centric view of the world – is the mark of all mental states. That even when a scientist proposes something such as E=MC2 they are only detaching themselves from the truth, for

the purpose of alluding to knowledge, but this is just a higher format of the I which would have been considered in an earlier version of the statement. That E=MC2 only makes sense, in terms of that a person was exhibiting his intentionality when they issued it as a truth ‘statement’. For example; when we consider the actions of others, we either consider how it would interfere with our life plans, our ability to be self-conscious and deem their action a problem or ethically immoral, or we relate ourselves ‘as if’ we were the person making the action and we believe “yes, I’d like the opportunity to do that action, therefore I will judge their act to be a morally good or virtuous act”. When we detach ourselves from the state of affairs between other persons or objects – this is called “higher order intentionality” where we build rules about ‘the way things are’ between the network of objects we are referring to, ignoring that we are making a statement related to the probabilities of potential opportunities and risks occurring associated with that state of affairs in respect to the self. “If the state of affairs between a group of objects exists in this way, then what does that mean for me? How can it benefit me? How can I avoid the risks associated with it?” It seems Brentano, Noam Chomsky, Freud and John Stuart Mill is stated that we believe we make this statement logically whenever we talk or think about the external world. That whenever we have any mental state – we are intending of objects - that whatever judgment is made in the mental mind, is an affirmation, a denial, a love, a hatred, a desire etc. of how the object affects the

person’s ability to continue to survive – in their truest sense – their actualization. If we use Aristotelian logic, then it follows that – because all things exist outside ourselves, but can only be understood to exist through the self – then we assume the same capacity that we have, that made us aware of the nature of the object – must also be contained within the object. Without our ability to reason (our soul) being entwined with the object the object ceases to exist. The object can only exist necessarily if it has the essence of being. Alternatively you could claim that we interpret the world through the self, and there we bias it through our interpretation – however this statement would assume the bias (ones reasoning), and the object can exist separately, this of course is logically impossible. Intentionality is the question of whether all forms of consciousness are conscious of something – the intent to do something with some object or attribute of that object. This is to say that every mental state has a desire or purpose that fuels it, which is either caused as a result of pursuing some selffocused goal, or the frustration that arises from not engaging in self-activity that arises from the self. That all sensations we have, for example a pain, a headache, anxiety, laughter, emotions – like depression, all have a purpose, according to the philosophy of intentionality. You may recognize this as the unconscious, as Freud, and other early psychology writers labelled this feeling, this energy that comes and goes throughout our lifetime, is sometimes awake and realized, and at other times is dormant – and we are lifeless,

can’t love and cannot engage in meaningful thought and activity. Various philosophers have attempted to explain why our energy for life; our vitality comes and goes, we will cover some of their views later on in this section, followed by a proposed solution. Menger like Aristotle believed that man has no innate ideas; that his ability to reason, to make action was his sole source of power over nature; his only means of survival. Menger wrote about determinism, mentioning free will could be understood to be affected by economic forces; but regardless of this influence of the outside world on the nature of a man’s thought; the primarily goal of man is to serve his own interest – to continue his own interest in its fullest unique sense. Edward Wayne Younkins (2005:23) We started this chapter with the idea that a Man’s happiness comes from his goal pursuits. John Stuart Mill said that “In order for a man to be happy, he must place upon himself some kind of goal, and then strive towards it”. However these goals must be meaningful pursuits, that are the by-product of your unique sense of self (Phenomenology) we all have unique experiences; and through reason these create our consciousness; and the pursuits that we need to self-actualize; the life goals that will make us happy. From this we have our sense of self over time, and we consider this selection of habits, attitudes, and traits to be the personality. Our ability to reason comes first; our senses come second and the way we use what we learn should aim to reinforce our ego by increasing our impact; we naturally want to have an identity that fits, but then keep challenging it and taking it further forming new connections in our brain between sets of neurons.

We take a piece of amazing music, we play it too often until we no longer can hear it, then we remix it and it becomes stimulating again. This process of deconstructing reality for the purposes of stimulation cannot be for its own sake; you can have as much coffee, go to as many cinema films, or dinner dates as you like, you can work on project after project and claim your career is progressing and that, that is a goal – but where is the underlying philosophy? Ideas are supposed to smash into one another, but in a meaningful way. You can’t just connect all ideas all over the place, the same way that someone might take drugs and experience Euphoria or if a comedian makes a joke about a current affair - what’s it to you? To give an example of the silly things people do while on drugs such as hallucinogens; to recall an example of someone I know; who takes a drug and suddenly can conceive of the literally works of many; and how they were all produced on paper – then thinks it artistic or clever to shred a sheet of paper – because the activity seems interesting and stimulating. The problem is that the activity doesn’t really mean anything – sure it was exciting, but you’ve pursued excitement and creativity at the expense of your good reason. You’ve allowed ideas to smash into each other – which your true nature wouldn’t usually combine. This alters the way you view the ideas permanently, and can cause one to feel confused by the own ideas, and perhaps sense of self – because they don’t really fit or are easy to interpret by the self.

Ayn Rand continues the point, that the subconscious and the conscious should be a reflection of the goals of the self and the underlying philosophy which they used to select those goals. She states that "Your subconscious is like a computer – programmed by your conscious mind; if you default, if you don’t reach any firm convictions, your subconscious is programmed by chance” Rand (1984:3) She says that if your subconscious is programmed by chance then this will be reflected in your ideas; you will not sure which idea to choose one way or another. She states that if you have reason and logic from which you decide your beliefs, your ideas. Then you understand the nature of your ideas and your emotions; and through this you have confidence in your being. She states that if a man doesn’t understand the background to his ideas, then he is run by his emotions. He doesn’t know whether his emotions reflect reality, where they come from, whether they are right or wrong – whether they promote his happiness, try to help him achieve his goals, or whether they try and force him in the direction of evil. She states “he is blind to the world around him and to his own inner world” Some philosophers, such as Hegel, and theologians, have seen man’s history as a story of separation from himself. That the true nature of man rests in his original form – perhaps God – or a platonic form. And Man must bring himself home back to his original self, using the only way he can truly know how through asserting his own right to exist on his own terms. Bolden, L. Bowman, M. Kaufman, S. Lindemann, D. (2003)

I object to objects! Is the personality separate from the soul? If you have a true platonic nature – is your personality a mimic of it, or is it a separate object. This has been the discussion of such authors as Karl Popper. Karl Popper and others such as Karl Marx, came to the conclusion that the nature of a man, is different to the nature of his core self – the self that comes into existence when we assert the phrase “I think therefore I am” – the source of our true platonic form. That they hypothesize that the personality itself – our character is an object external to ourselves, the same way that objects are external from ourselves. That’s assuming that our personality or character is separate from the soul – to achieve this we need to discuss whether a character and its soul that it’s from can become separated. We are here referring to other forces other than the soul (our ability to reason), that interfere and make up our features; attitudes, thoughts, behaviours, feelings. Thinkers such as Hegel; are speaking of an Alienation of man – where Man has become separated from himself – thinkers such as Erich Fromm suppose that the early work on the ‘unconscious’ as defined by Freudian and Post-Freudian thinkers – is that the unconscious forces are the character – the object – that is an internalisation of external conflict in object relations. In Freud’s earliest theory of the unconscious. (Freud, S. 1905) Drive Theory – unconscious energy becomes attached to objects

– other people – in particular parental influences whilst one is an infant. That, in the case of the parental influences we use our parents as information about the character of our-self – we internalize their features; as we treat ourselves as a version of them or our parents as a version of ourselves. These mental representations of objects, and other people – come to inform our judgement about new information we encounter; they become the filter through which we see the world. In Freudian and post Freudian literature they are labelled different names, such as; "Internal objects", "illusionary others," "introjects," "personifications," and the constituents of a "representational world." According to psychodynamic (Freudian) thinkers; these mental representations of others serve as a method to anticipate the future, as a means of self-preservation; so we learn about likely events, and we from this we have a sense of what is to be expected from people who we meet in the real world. These mental images of what to expect; and how they influence the self, come to offer a personal experience of what type of character one is, who are his persecutors who are out to destroy him, and what objects are sources of desire or resourcefulness. In other words we have an internal map of relationships with people that had an important impact on our lives, primarily our attachment figures as an infant – our parents. And these relationships shape our interpretation of the relationships we form with others later in life. The judgements about us, the conflicts, the focus of the relationship becomes “‘internalized’ and so come to shape

subsequent attitudes, reactions, and perceptions and so on.” Greenberg, J. Mitchell, S. (1983:11) Freud believed that the primarily motivation of a man’s life is to procreate – i.e. sexual stimulation. And this was the force that encourages our desire to continue existence; that is the primarily source of all human wants, needs and desires. This idea of the primarily source of energy being thought of as a sexual unconscious – became the central focus for critics of the Freudian theory. One of these critics was Erich Fromm, a philosopher throughout the 20th century. Although he shared the believe that the personality-character of a self was an object se00parate to the self – he disagreed that it – the unconscious – was caused by deep routed sexual libido (desires) and their interaction with the surrounding environment – in particular the parental-infant relationship was inaccurate. Erich Fromm was undoubtedly a genius like everyone we’ve mentioned so far in the text. He instead believed that character is not formed by “the phases of libidinal development but is a psychic (interjected energy) entity that is created by the various ways in which man relates to the world.” That we should understand this internalized personality as a internalisation of its relation to the socio-economic situation. Fromm, E. (1982) We could take this to mean that the abundance of a certain influence will cause one person to be a certain way. That our wants, desires etc. are a kind of volition sense – a desire to exert power over our “external sphere” to produce something that we are proud of that represents our self onto the external world using the resources available to us.

This thinking that our attempts to control the external environment & its parts within our personality had already been discussed; in moral philosophy by several philosophers living in the century prior; in order to explain a philosophical account of how we choose; requires we look at: John Stuart Mill and his work on individuality, the work of his father James Mill on Utility theory, Karl Marx social political economic systems, Charles Darwin and his economics of evolution style thinking, and Adam Smith for his work on the advantages gained from building relationships with others. James Mill explains how motivation to make a decision works according to his utilitarianism – he states “The source of happiness is to affirm oneself” to have some true sense of existence. To make ones “subjective sense of individuality objectified” to have your “specific character turned into some kind of works available for consumption” This is the way to manifest your individuality into the external world. That it is Man’s essential nature [and source of unconscious energy] to “have their sense of self be objective witnessed, visible, to the senses and hence a power beyond all doubt… When I look at the object I would have the individual pleasure of knowing that I not only objectively exist in my own mind. “(James Mill, is John Stuart Mills Father) Blunden, A. Baggins, B. Ryan, S. Walters, D. Batur, Sertan. Nehru, A. Bismo, M. (19992008) When another person displaying enjoyment or use of my product I would have the direct enjoyment both of being conscious and of having satisfied a human need by my work, that by objectifying my own essential nature, I have thus created an object corresponding to the need of another man’s essential

nature. Blunden, A. Baggins, B. Ryan, S. Walters, D. Batur, Sertan. Nehru, A. Bismo, M. (1999-2008: James Mill) Erich Fromm states; "When a man is born, the stage is set for him. He has to eat and drink, and therefore he has to work; and this means he has to work under the particular conditions and in the ways that are determined for him by the kind of society he is born. Both factors, his need to live and the social system, in principle are unalterable by him as an individual, and they are the factors which determine the traits of his personality; his thoughts etc." Erich Fromm (2001:14) According to the philosophy of Kant, A man must always be an end to himself and never a means to an end. He states “Nature has willed that man should, by himself, produce everything that goes beyond the mechanical ordering of his animal existence, and that he should partake of no other happiness or perfection than that which he himself, independently of instinct, has created by his own reason.” Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) According to Erich Fromm – every man has to make tough decisions – whereby they sacrifice one goal of the self in order to seek another new kind of pleasure. He believes that it is the nature of all men that - because they interpret external objects through the self – then it logically follows that we try to treat others as a means to our own ends. He states “Every man tries to establish his power over others in order to satisfy his own egotistic need” – as we are about to see it is for this reason that Marx sees it necessary to protect the individual man from the government or the industrialists, at risk that he will be exploited for their whim at the expense of his own masculinity. Erich Fromm believes that because our lack of understanding of the true nature of another – and the impossibility of doing so –

we instead - try to alienate others from their own self of sense (their end) by attempting to encourage them to commit to the duty of producing our own end. We subvert others from their sense of being; because we want them to serve us. Before the industrial revolution this perhaps would have been impossible – if you were a farmer who all you did for your entire life was produce enough food for you and your family; then other than the intellectual subservience that may occur internally within the household – speaking aside from that, then the farmer or the household wouldn’t be a slave to any other man other than themselves and each other. If the household happened to produce more than required for the household, they could take this excess supply to the market and it would be bought by a middle man, who would sell it to where it was in demand because of limited supply – because perhaps another household happened to produce too little of the stock, and therefore would be unable to feed themselves. In the years where the farmer produces too much, he would make enough barter to be able to afford to buy stock during the years where he failed to produce enough. This all sounds very well and good; it sounds like some utopian paradise – but it’s forgetting a few forces. Its forgetting that the value of the currency that the man has kept over time loses its worth; known as inflation, and its forgetting that the middle man has taken a percentage revenue – so in the years when the farmer buys food – he won’t be able to buy as much as he gave away – which one way or another is likely to leave a gap – a period where the farmer didn’t have enough food for his household and therefore consequently will starve.

The socio-political-economic system of external society attempts to fix this problem by using the force of division of labour. We split tasks between one another, where one person specialises in one task, and another in another task, that make up individual parts of the end product; by doing this our output increases dramatically. Philosophy and perhaps the founder of economics Adam Smith explains the ‘Division of Labour’ - he analysed a Pin factory and noted that by using 10 men who each specialized in making a particular part of the pin led to a 240 or 4800 fold increase in the amount of pin production the factory was capable of than if the men each created a pin each “Each person, therefore, making a tenth part of forty-eight thousand pins, might be considered as making four thousand eight hundred pins in a day. But if they had all wrought separately and independently, and without any of them having been educated to this peculiar business, they certainly could not each of them have made twenty, perhaps not one pin in a day; that is, certainly, not the two hundred and fortieth, perhaps not the four thousand eight hundredth part of what they are at present capable of performing, in consequence of a proper division and combination of their different operations.” Adam Smith (1776) The obvious problem with this is; is that, the man’s goal initially was to provide him the resources to continue his existence; to increase his wealth of knowledge – his understanding of himself – the nature of the forms – understand virtue, produce himself into the world through – self defined acts – to add external objectivity his nature. But to solve the issue of lack of production we are giving up our ability to produce works that reflect our nature – instead to

produce the smallest part of a pin, from which we don’t intend to use to continue our existence. Like in the example of the farmer - the gap created by the market – the inflation – the cut taken by the middle man – leaves a too little supply for the farmer to be able to feed himself and his family, although division of labour seems like a solution to this problem it isn’t because the man was merely interested in choosing his acts, in actualizing his existence. Erich Fromm; believes that the monetary system is the ultimate way to detach a man to produce excess production that isn’t for his own end – thereby allowing value for others. And he believes as a result of the monetary system we become alienated from our true sense of self – the ends we should be pursuing and instead are “subservient to inhuman, depraved, unnatural, and imaginary” goals and appetites. As cities began to grow from Entrepreneurs taking over; and producing cotton and so on; Karl Marx began writing about how this tyranny was immoral – how the workers in the factories were being exploited. From Marx’s work on the Alienation of the Self – we can understand some things about what he believed about morality, and the nature of psychology – how a Man is supposed to live; and how a Man becomes detached from his purpose; the term he created for this was “Alienation”. And he wrote about it as he lived during the industrial revolution in England, which often meant the rich got richer and average worker was reduced almost to slave status. Marx’s saw that the lives of men who worked in the factories, in the cities that although they were paid better than the farmers in

the countryside – their quality of life was much worse; and that their ability to think for themselves was reduced. The factories owners disagreed – they believe that if these men – these workers weren’t so lazy they would get up and be entrepreneurs like the factory owner. But Marx believed that one’s surroundings makes up the personality – that these men had their thoughts reduced by the long hours – the poor pay – the repetitive tasks – they became so far detached from their own end – making profit for someone else’s that they became unable to proceed to innovate an original idea from which they could be in demand for and thus profit like an entrepreneur. That the environment around the man, creates the soul of the man. Karl Marx recognized that the industrialists were exploiting their workforce, paying them very little, offering them poor working conditions and lifestyle opportunity, reducing the workforce’s capacity for control of their own destiny – forcing a monopoly over their lifestyle choices. Marx’s believed that this came from a belief that industrialists believed that the value of “a commodity is determined by the quantity of labour spent on it, the more idle and unskilful the labourer, the more valuable would his commodity be, because more time would be required in its production.” Marx, C. (18631878) and therefore the more time spent on the product production was the only important factor – not the thoughts, personality or soul of the worker – just the amount of hours that he could use his hands to perform basic routines – without ceasing to exist. Unlike Fordism, a philosophy about human freedom developed by the industrialist Henry Ford, which originated from a philosophy of man called Taylorism developed by Frederick

Taylor whose theories attempted to constrict Man’s freedom by incentivising man through the offering of high wages. It should be noted today that ‘Scientific Management’ his theory that the micromanagement of every aspect of the workers activity will increase the productivity capacity of each worker is still treated as a serious approach to running an organisation by many organisational psychologists. In response to such a dire view as to call ‘Men lazy’ – the accusation made by Taylor, Ford, and others, Erich Fromm replied “Many thinkers believe that man is lazy. It is wrote in the Jewish faith that when “Moses asked Pharaoh to let the Jewish people go so that they might “Serve God in the desert”, his answer was; “you are lazy, nothing but lazy.” To Pharaoh slave labour meant doing things; worshipping God was laziness. The same judgement of ‘people are lazy’ was adopted by all those who wanted to profit from activity of others and had no use for productiveness, which they could not exploit.” Fromm, E. (1990) Therefore the factory towns erupted with this goal in mind – to increase output, building tiny houses around the factories or inside of them; and creating restrictions that forced the worker to work as long hours as physically possible as regularly as possible – with his source of motivation being – to continue being alive – not to run out of money and thus food; with no regard to the unique nature of the soul of the man. These towns; whether they realize it or not developed to reduce peoples capacity for thought – to express their own unique attributes – and perform them for his own means; to exist only for himself. Marx recognized that it was society’s role to prevent this from happening – from a few industrialists profiteering and

exploiting the masses to produce excess supply for no good reason. Marx disagreed with the idea that men are lazy; he believed that men might be lazy when producing for another man’s end. But not the end for himself, he states “Man produces even when he is free from physical need…He duplicates himself not only, as in consciousness, intellectually, but also actively, in reality, and therefore he contemplates himself in a world that he has created” Fromm, E. (1990:76). He goes on to argue that estranging man from this free productivity essentially alienates him from his true form.” He states “A commodity is, in the first place, an object outside us, a thing that by its properties satisfies human wants of some sort or another. The nature of such wants, whether, for instance, they spring from the stomach or from fancy, makes no difference.” Marx, C. (1863-1878). he continues “The utility of a thing makes it a use value.(4*) But this utility is not a thing of air.” That “This property of a commodity is independent of the amount of labour required to appropriate its useful qualities.” That “Exchange-value, at first sight, presents itself as a quantitative relation, as the proportion in which values in use of one sort are exchanged for those of another sort,” Because Marx recognized that the external environment created a man’s sense of self – and Marx believed the moral thing to do was to allow humans to maximize their own happiness he thus dedicated his life’s work to creating a political-economic system that he believed would allow ‘freedom of thought’ for all, treating everyone in existence equally in order to encourage them to innovate, to produce works of art, to define the world around them. The system he proposed for this was communism;

as Communism he writes "is the genuine resolution of the antagonism between man and nature and between man and man; it is the true resolution of the conflict between existence and essence, objectification and self-affirmation, freedom and necessity, individual and species. Marx, K. Locke, J. Simon, L. Winkler, K. (1994) What is a free man? How can we take hold of our own existence and choose life goals that better ourselves to recognize when we are exploiting ourselves or letting others exploit us. It seems from our literature review that it’s far too easy to let objects outside of us – end up becoming an end in themselves rather than working for the ultimate end – your own - “The stuff you own ends up owning you” – Palahniuk, C.Uhls, J. (1999) The philosopher Hegel – holds that true freedom – “is the capacity to abstract from all particular determinations, desires and interests. This capacity is what makes someone a person “a self-consciousness of itself as a perfectly abstract self” Allen W. Wood (1990) Karl Marx makes a form of philosophical joke, describing people as “Homo Faber” what he means is that people need to fabricate – to commit volition – self guided acts – to use the objects of the world to better themselves in their own unique way – to produce innovations, works of art, ideas and so on that are unique to the self. "There is no meaning to life except the meaning man gives his life by the unfolding of his powers." (Erich Fromm: Man for himself)This is labelling theory; which is a sociological and psychological branch of social construct theory – the philosophy of constructivism. Social Constructivism is simply that we generate beliefs, feelings, thoughts, through our learning

activities while interacting with others. “To a large extent, a person's behavior is a result of individual wants (values) and considerations of what is true about the world or oneself (beliefs) Scheibe, K. (1970) On this ‘unfolding of one’s powers – is freedom’ Hegel states “a person must give its freedom an external sphere in order to exist as Idea” (PR 41). “Idea for Hegel, refers to a rational concept when it expresses or embodies itself in something real….. a spiritual being such as ourselves only feels the force of our own existance when it actualizes itself appropriately in the objective world. I “exist as Idea” when my personality, my capacity to make abstract choices (choices external to the self) is given adequate scope to actualize itself, and this happens (according to Hegel) when I have sufficient “external sphere” subject to my arbitrary choice.” Allen W. Wood (1990:77) Fichte explains this further “The self defines itself through its own activity; but it is nevertheless limited or finite, distinguishable from other objects. This means that the self’s activity must be limited by a notself, an objective world different from and opposed to the self. From this Fichte infers that we can only be aware of activities (choices) that are practical or achievable. That choices, ideas, others are volitions; they are defined by your ability to interact with them – our thoughts are concerned with altering an outside world. He continues to explain time, and space around us in terms of object relations. That since our self awareness is implicit of a volition over an external object. The process of transformation of the relation between the self and the object; the changes during the interaction, create the concept of time.

Innovate for Free "Most men, live under the illusion that they follow their own ideas and inclinations, that they are individualists, that they have arrived at their opinions as the result of their own thinking - and that it just happens that their ideas are the same as those of the majority. The consensus serves as a proof for the correctness of their ideas." Being as they have little that differentiates them, they reduce themselves to being differentiate based on the initials printed on their T-Shirt. Or by their list of favourite movie titles mentioned on their social media presence ‘about me’ section Fromm, E (1956:9) You want me to leave you alone, you say? "My life is good enough so who cares", “Everyone struggles”, “no one’s perfect”. If you believe in the laws of logic and contradiction in their platonic form you have to accept, that the slightest contradiction is an absolute one. The only meaning to life, is the meaning to man makes for himself by exploring his, and unfolding his powers. “Well, I'm not gonna leave you alone. I want you to get mad! I don't want you to protest. I wouldn't know what to tell you to protest about... All I know is that first you've got to get mad. You've got to say, 'I'm a HUMAN BEING, God damn it! My life has VALUE!' - Network (1976) Capitalists claim that the free market is about people freely competing for their own rights and values. Well, I wonder, if industrialists work employees in a set routined standardized fashion; where is the free market innovation and

competitiveness amongst them. The free market, isn't free enough, it’s time to get mad for your uniqueness. You can’t claim to be a ‘free market economy’ when you have capitalism amongst the ‘players’ but socialism in the office place. The free market isn’t free if it doesn’t allow free competition amongst everyone. This view of humanity as lazy and worthless just isn't true. I'm made to believe I’m worthless, that I have to do for someone else, because I couldn't do anything of worth myself. The perfect economic relation would be "the characteristic of the individual in the capitalist society. (where) each person works for himself, individualistically, at his own risk and not primarily in co-operation with others. But he is not a Robinson Crusoe; he needs others, as customers, as employees or as employers. He must buy and sell, give and task. The market whether it is the commodity or the labour market, regulates these relations. Thus the individual primarily alone and self sufficient, enters into economic relations with others as a means to one end; to sell and to buy. Fromm, E. (1942, 8)

The Hero Returns “Only to the extent that man exposes himself over and over again to annihilation, can that which is indestructible arise within him”. -- Karlfried Graf von Durckheim Consciousness as self-activity “Man’s real needs are an expression of his universality, the nature of the species which is reborn in each individual. They are essential needs which lead to relationships with both the human and the natural world, in a reciprocal dialectic between

the naturalness of man and the humanization of nature” Biancoli (1989) “It is understood that the subject as an individual is born with an allotment of needs. But let me repeat once more, needs as an internal force may be realized only in activity. “Leontev, A. (1978) That is to say that psychic energy is related to what ideas are in demand, the demand in the world; creates an internal force within the self. It sounds silly right? But suppose the morality of a human who hasn’t accepted a morality. Or the decision of a person or hasn’t chosen a decision; if someone has no underlying philosophy – they are quickly labelled with opinions, values, beliefs, and make decisions that aren’t their own. When their peers make judgements “your smart”, “Your dumb”, “Your too selfish”, “You’re a nice person” we accept that we have that version of our self within us, and automatically it becomes the dominant feature of our nature; the label comes to define us – because such a man lacks definition within himself. Not to be selfish “implies not to do what one wishes, to give up one's own wishes for the sake of those in authority; i.e., the parents, and later the authorities of society. „Don't be selfish” Fromm, E. (1939b) “Eyes to see with ears to hear with, a brain to reason and perceive with, a heart to feel with, organs and their use, faculties and functions this is the Marxist concept of human nature, „dynamic and full of energy“ The concreteness of human nature lies in its position as the need for self-affirmation, selfproduction, in the world. In the Manuscripts work is called

“self-activity“ insofar as human beings and nature are in a reciprocal relationship in which the naturalness of man shows its worth as an expression of active need which interacts with nature and humanizes it. However, the psychologist in Marx sees the “ambiguous character of needs“ Needs can be artificial even if they are not perceived as such” Fromm, E.Biancoli, R. (1989)

Free Will, Psychology & NeuroScience For thousands of years philosophers have looked at human act, and questioned what drives and motivates people to commit one activity over another and how society as a whole can decide what actions are most valuable. What is free will? According to the Encyclopedia of Columbia free will is a philosophic concern; that assumes individuals, regardless of forces external to them, is still able and does choose at least some of his actions. Do we possess free will, do we have an ability to choose our actions? In order to discover a considered answer as to whether we possess free will provides us taking into account the processes that exercise that will. Therefore we should look at the the mechanisms within the brain that participate in decision making. Free will is about our ability to make choices, and is an essential question if we are going to uncover whether its really possible to make others do what we want them to do through persuasion; or whether thats just a pipe dream. To reject Free Will is refered to as psychological determinism, it assumes that all behaviour, thoughts, etc were always envitiable

to happen. It sounds like a outlandishly bold claim, and theres plenty of reasons we might want to argue against it. For example; if someone was always going to steal a car, or rob a bank, or murder someone then is it really fair to put them in prison as a result of their crime, as it isn’t really their crime nor their fault? A visit to one of our nation’s jails or prisons will show rows of humans kept behind bars, many of whom have returned to prison on a second or third offense, committed despite their firsthand knowledge of the consequences of their actions. As a society we justify the imprisonment of such individuals by our belief that one can avoid incarceration: that someone sentenced to spend years in prison got there only through his or her own choices. That is, we possess a freedom of will, and it is misuse of that freedom that justifies restrictions on it. Burns, K.Bechara, A. (2007) Answers to such questions have dramatic consequences for our ethical and legal systems. I feel responsible for my voluntary acts and am likely to be held responsible for them by the courts. But, if my conscious self is not responsible for my acts and if the act is determined by preconscious processing, can‘t I plead, in mitigation, that I could not have chosen to do otherwise as the acts were controlled by my non-conscious brain? Max Velmans (2008) Jeffrey Rosen wrote in The New York Times Magazine, “Since all behavior is caused by our brains, wouldn’t this mean all behavior could potentially be excused? … The death of free will, or its exposure as a convenient illusion, some worry, could

wreak havoc on our sense of moral and legal responsibility.” Eddy, N. (2011) The question of free will goes strikes the core foundation of our views about human nature and how we relate to the universe and to natural laws. Are we completely prearranged by the determistic nature of physical laws? Are we just “essentially sophisticated automatons, with our conscious feelings and intentions tacked on as a phenomenological accident? Or is it that we really do have some independence in making choices and actions, not completely determined by the known physical laws?”. When consciously reading this sentence for example you become aware of the printed text on the page, accompanied, perhaps, by inner speech (phonemic imagery) and a feeling of understanding (or not). But you have no introspective access to the processes that enable you to read. Nor does one have introspective access to the details of most other forms of cognitive functioning, for example to the detailed operations that enable conscious learning, remembering, engaging in conversations with others and so on. Max Velmans (2008) That although we might be aware of many things; there are things that go on inside our own brains that we are not always quite aware of and perhaps these cause behaviours, attitudes etc. that we are not sure we necessarily chose? We could say that in your environment, you often have a limited set of choices provided; for example in a supermarket you might have only three brands of beans on sale. And therefore making your decision about which brand of beans you buy isn’t your

choice because you can’t buy from any of the other 1000’s of bean selling competitors that exist. However, this is perhaps a silly route of enquiry to show that we don’t have quite as much control over life as we would like, but the commonplace view of free will actually takes account of the fact that we cannot control everything in our surroundings, most philosophers, and it seems general public believe that we can only control the things we know about, and have access to; leaving free will to be something conceptual, the ability to recall information we know about, and be able to act within the best of our abilities, to be able to choose to think about which one of our long-ago memories we want to choose to recall, or to be able to decide what would be an interesting meal choice for this evening. If we are ever asked what we are thinking, we can normally answer. We often seem to believe that we have an understanding about what is going on in our own minds, that we make consistent rational decisions and one thought leads to another in an orderly way. But that is not really the way the mind works… most of our impressions actually come from your experience of consciousness without understanding any of the reasoning on how they emerged. Kahneman, D. (2011) I also want to recommend this news article for addition reading. Burkeman, O. (2011) A great deal of my thoughts and ideas, not only inspired from my time studying; but inspired by this new trend in books to explain every decision people make as an economic one i.e. that promotes utility. Daniel Kahneman I believe has been one of the most important researchers into psychology of our time. I know

other hypnotists have their scientist gurus; but this one is mine. He lives in an airy penthouse on the 14th floor of an apartment block in downtown Manhattan, not far from the Eighth Street subway station. But never mind that for a moment. Instead, without thinking too hard about it, try answering the following question: roughly what percentage of the member states of the United Nations are in Africa? (I'll wait.) Your answer to the above question; might seem irrelevant to this essay into conversational hypnosis; however its not; If I told you Daniel Kahneman is 77 years old, your answer would have been significantly higher as to how many member states from the United Nations are in Africa. Because I told you about the eighth subway street, and the 14th apartment block; your answer was much lower than the number of UN members there are in Africa. Kahneman, states that, “Words and other stimuli activate relevant mental processes. Once 'switched on', this cognitive machinery remains accessible for a while, influencing subsequent thoughts and actions. When priming affects the estimation of number values, psychologists call it anchoring.” William Poundstone (2011:94) In one of many studies testing the theory that perhaps all of our decisions are pre-determined – that there is brain activity that determines the choice we make; before we make a choice; The scientist Smith, K (2011) and his research team at the Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience in Berlin, involved putting people into a brain scanner (FRMI) in which a display screen flashed a succession of random letters1. He told them to press a button with either their right or left index fingers whenever they felt the urge, and to remember the letter that was showing on the screen when they made the decision. The

experiment used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to reveal brain activity in real time as the volunteers chose to use their right or left hands. The results were quite a surprise. "The first thought we had was 'we have to check if this is real'," says Haynes. "We came up with more sanity checks than I've ever seen in any other study before." The conscious decision to push the button was made about a second before the actual act, but the team discovered that a pattern of brain activity seemed to predict that decision by as many as seven seconds. Long before the subjects were even aware of making a choice, it seems, their brains had already decided. Smith, K (2011) However, it was found in these type of studies that consciouswill could affect the outcome of the volitional process even though the latter was initiated by unconscious cerebral processes. Conscious-will might block or veto the process so that no act occurs. The existence of this veto process seems evidential. In the study, the subjects at times reported that a conscious wish or urge to act appeared but they supressed or vetoed that and thus failed to lift a handle. All of us, not just experimental subjects have experienced our vetoing a spontaneous urge to perform some act. This often occurs when the urge to act involves some socially unacceptable consequence, like an urge to shout some obscenity at a boss or to stop yourself urinating in public. Another hypothetical function for the conscious will could be to serve as a ‘trigger’ that is required to enable the volitional

process to proceed to final action. However there is no evidence for this, as there is only evidence to veto a given thoughtprocess, but no evidence to support that the process once initiated in the unconscious brain? (wherever that begins) needs to be triggered. The way I can imagine this is a kind of water-pistol that is being filled up with water, this particular water pistol has a dysfunctional trigger, that when the pressure of the water residing in the barrel of the water pistol is great enough water will begin dripping out of the end of the gun, however, one can always push this faulty trigger up into the gun to prevent the water leaking out. Perhaps this represents some age old battle between personality dualisms, Freuds ideas of there being a ‘Superego’ that controls the impulses that are created by the ‘Id’. Freud saw that the unconscious had desires and wants, primarily associated with food and sex, and it was the job of the rule-judgement based logic of the super-ego closely associated with ‘strong opinions’, laws, moral-code and the like to prevent the person just doing what their natural bodily instinct was. Freudian theory, can be explained through a simple illustration; for example; we might be hungry, but we can delay and plan what we would like to eat because of our ego which allows us the time to weigh up “What would be right” from our superego, which might depending on the person say that a healthy meal would be good, but then the id simply complaining that its hungry and needing satisfaction. The idea of there been two parts to the psyche (consciousness) goes back a long time in philosophy, for example Plato commonly distinguished the “animal” and “rational” parts of

our nature, with the rational part being particularly complex. He believed that our rational nature comes from our ability to judge what is a ‘good’ activity, what ‘goal’ is worth pursuing and seeking this goal despite considerable unpleasantness. For example early on this evening I was particularly hungry, I could have easily cooked something from the freezer, but instead I decided to walk across town and go to a restaurant that I like. I had to temporarily delay my desire to eat, in order to achieve a value that I deemed ‘worthwhile’. Like proclaimed by Freud, and other philosophers, it’s now widely accepted in child cognitive development that children are poor at planning, and reflecting; “That their behaviour is more dominated by the impulsive system—children tend to behave in a manner that they do what they feel like doing right now, without much thought about the future. However, through learning they learn to constrain many desires and behaviours that conflict with social rules, and that lead to negative consequences. This is the first sign of the development of willpower, and an example of how the reflective system gains control over the impulsive system. Burns, K.Bechara, A. (2007:267) In order to understand this ability to choose according to longterm outcomes, and resist immediate desires; requires that individuals can recall and trigger memories, imaginings, of ‘other states’ than their current impulses. For example, if I’m hungry I can imagine all of the good meals I’ve had and then make a decision based on that, rather than just immediate eating what is close by, it’s triggering of these somatic states by the reflective/planning system which signal how valuable long-term outcomes are over immediate concerns.

In order to understand this ‘impulsive’ part of the human psyche, we might first research what the word impulsive means; ‘thefreedictionary.com’ states that the word ‘impulsive’ refers to actions based on sudden desires, whims, or inclinations rather than careful planning or thought. And that some people could be described in English as “an impulsive person” that these actions are based on emotional impulses or whims; and are somewhat spontaneous, like “an impulsive kiss” that they are compelling. The dictionary tells me that to fully understand the meaning of the word impulsive we should take a read of the word ‘Spontaneous’ which is an adjective that states, that spontaneous is when a thing occurs, produced or is performed by natural processes but without any external influence, for example, “a spontaneous comment” or a “spontaneous movement” and arises from “personal impulse”. Much credit is perhaps owed to Freud for originally bringing public attention to the idea of their being a non-conscious side to the psyche; despite his model was never shown to be reliable in research studies. For most of the mid-twentieth century various eccentrically-theoretical post-Freudian models were created. But in this modern era considering all the latest complex research into neurology surely we are capable of coming up with a more up-to-date and explanatory model of human mental existence? In the year 2000 researchers Smith and DeCoster began a systematic comparison of the nine predominant models of mental life, and compared and contrasted their similarities and differences; they found they on the whole shared the concept of two distinctive systems of the psyche. Strack, F. Deutsch, R. (2004) Burns and Bechara (2007) explain these two sides “In all cases, the distinction is between the operations of one system that are

typically fast, automatic, effortless, implicit and habitual, and the operations of another system that are slow, deliberate, effortful, explicit and rule governed.” To explain further the differences between the systems Strack and Deutch (2004) explain “The reflective system generates behavioural decisions that are based on knowledge about facts and values, whereas the impulsive system elicits behaviour through associative links and motivational orientations”. Kahneman amongst others outlines the brain to contain two systems, and impulsive system (one where associations are built through classic stimulus and response conditioning, and associations are activated by seeing/hearing associated material in the environment, and increases when attention paid to it) that passes variables to its sub-component the reflective system; which then generalises content into some kind of assumption, attitude, rationalisation, or the decision to make an action. It should be pointed out that although the working memory of the reflective system can ‘work’ data, it can only consider a few things at a time, and the information considered is nearly always pre-determined. In order to begin to understand the process of human choicemaking, we need to understand the process an idea goes through before it’s acted upon. Various questions come about from this impulsive/reflective system. Is it quite as simple as saying there are two clearly distinct faculties of the human psyche as a unconscious (impulsive system) and a conscious mind (reflective system); as previously was theorized; or is there a more complicated series of processes? In order to determine this perhaps we should look at the situations that break this model?

Are there impulses that are so strong that immediately they are carried out into behaviours without the option of a veto taking place? Is the option of a veto taking place always possible? Is there a mechanism that offers the option of taking a veto, just as the very thought itself came from the preconscious why couldn’t the veto opportunity also appear in that manner? According to Encarta Encyclopaedia (2006) Will or possessing will power is a combination of determination and self-discipline which allows someone to focus on the benefits of the future and overcome present desires/struggles. However, this definition can easily be shown to be incorrect as there are for-sure certain situations in which the impulsive system overpowers the reflective system. For example; could you have serious surgery carried out on you while fully awake knowing that you need to avoid the current pain in order to achieve the future benefit of being healthy? The answer is likely no. When I think back to a time when my shoulder became dislocated the doctors attempted to put my arm back into the socket while I was fully conscious; they gave me a gag to put in my mouth; I told them “I want my arm back in the socket, I don’t need a gag” they disagreed, they said that I would have no option (despite my best intentions) but to scream uncontrollably – They were right – it was so painful that my arm went into spasm and they had no choice but to put me to sleep in order to perform the surgery. Perhaps pain isn’t the only circumstance that an impulsive amygdala emotion can burst through and overcome the reflective system; perhaps also pleasure seeking can also have the same effect? Why would someone resist the temptation to have something irresistible, or delay the gratification from something that is appealing?

If you walked into a dark alleyway and there you discovered a briefcase full of money in high bill notes, just lying there – would you take it and run? It’s a tough decision; and for you to weigh up all the pros-and-cons of taking the money would require a great amount of reflection and processing; running through dozens of hypothetical outcomes, then counter-moves that you could take in response to those twists and turns of life as a result of taking the money; to process such a task could require as much detail as writing a book like this one takes, you need to consider everything. But the problem with ‘just finding a briefcase in an alleyway’ if by its innate quality; you don’t have time to ponder because unless you take it now the opportunity will disappear, and if you go back another time to grab it then that also requires a great deal of processing as to whether coming back for it is even more risky? The authors Burns and Berchara (2007) eventually come to a utilitarian conclusion that reflects the economic model that we shall later propose that governs human decision making. “The final decision is determined by the relative strengths of that pain or pleasure signals associated with immediate or future prospects. When the immediate prospect is unpleasant, but the future is more pleasant, then the positive signal of future prospects forms the basis for enduring the unpleasantness of immediate prospects. Otherwise, the immediate prospects predominate, and decisions shift towards short-term horizons” In other-words all the time you are weighing the pro’s (positive feelings) and (negative feelings) in the immediate short term, and long term planning of goals; and all these emotional-states conflict with one another; eventually resulting in an overall state. That often conflicting imaginative-states are triggered, but

stronger ones gain selective advantage over weaker ones. [see cognitive priming later in this book] With each ‘‘thought’’ brought to working memory, the strength of the somatic state triggered by this ‘‘thought’’ determines whether the same ‘‘thought’’ is likely to recur (i.e. will be brought back to memory so that it triggers another somatic state that reinforces the previous one), or whether the ‘‘thought’’ is likely to be eliminated. Thus over the course of pondering a decision, positive and negative somatic markers that are strong are reinforced, while weak ones are eliminated. This process of elimination can be very fast. Ultimately, a winner takes all; an overall, more dominant, somatic state emerges (a ‘‘gut feeling’’ or ‘‘a hunch’’ so to speak) (Burns and Berchara (2007:265) Many modern cognitive models propose that working memory shouldn’t be viewed as controlled consciously or reflectively by some form of pre-frontal executive control. But instead have a number of subcomponents that can recall, store, and manipulate memory relatively autonomously and automatically. For example numerous studies have now been carried out using modern techniques of interpreting what images people are imagining. And have shown that even people who have conscious awareness disorders; for example being in a coma or a vegetative state due to a car accident etc. are still able to carry out imagination exercises following the suggestions of a researcher. In one case study when a young woman in a vegetative state was asked to imagine playing tennis or navigate her way around her house, significant activity was observed in her brain, similar to the activity in the brain of healthy volunteers performing the same tasks. Alumit Ishai (2010)

The visual cortex is the same part of the brain that allows people to see pictures and images, whether they are looking at them through their eyesight, dreaming those pictures as part of a dream, are hallucinating those experiences as the result of the suggestions of a hypnotist or simply imagining those images all use the same part of the brain, and the brain looks roughly identical to scientists watching it through an MRI scanner regardless of which way people are viewing pictures inside their mental capacity. As Berkeley Gallant Lab researcher Shinji Nishimoto comments “Our natural visual experience is like watching a movie”. And a further exciting advance to our understanding about the visual cortex is now as a result of much hard work scientists at the university of Berkeley have published a paper along with a YouTube video that made newspaper reporters go crazy. This study showed that using an FRMI scanner and some complicated predictive system that back works from the blood flow in the brain what neurons are being fired off. Can actually work out what type of images people are looking at and this computer system can begin to anticipate what those images that the person is imagining or watching look like. “The participants of the study while inside an FMRI scanner watched two separate sets of Hollywood movie trailers, while fMRI was used to measure blood flow through the visual cortex, the part of the brain that processes visual information. On the computer, the brain was divided into small, three-dimensional cubes known as volumetric pixels, or voxels.” Yasmin Anwar (2011) What you see on the computer screen is the [almost] live video of what people are seeing within their mental capacity inside

their own head. Eventually, practical applications of the technology could include a better understanding of what goes on in the minds of people who cannot communicate verbally, such as stroke victims, coma patients and people with neurodegenerative diseases. ; Thereby showing that a great deal of mental processes occurs without a conscious executive control being active. Yasmin Anwar (2011). Studies into imagining without the requirement of a conscious executive control (because the prefrontal-lobe [conscious executive control] is damaged for example) lead some researchers to hypothesize the existence of a unconsciousexecutive-control, as it would seem that some other process is organising, processing, and directing all of the different associations, information, that is required in order to imagine such a complex experience. Strack and Deutsch have broken down the different theoretical systems that seem to be used when a decision, like the one to press the button in the original Libet experiment would be carried out. The Diagram from Strack, F. Deutsch, R. (2004) demonstrates the various phases. The way Strack and Deutsch explain it is that in the reflective system behaviour is elicited as a consequence of a decision process (however this decision process began pre-consciously) knowledge about values and probabilities of the necessariness of making a potential consequence is weighed and integrated to reach for a behavioural option. If a decision is made, the reflective system activates appropriate behavioral schemata through a self-terminating mechanism of intending, so the intending sequence is activated and a schemata of associative/attitude/learning is called; this intention process

can be activated either from perceptual input or as a result from a reflective (imaginary) process. That is to say; behaviour may be elicited without the persons intention or goal. What this means is that Primarily inducers (High Arousal, Drugs, black or white thinking etc.) Trigger fast, automatic, and obligatory somatic states via the amygdala system, Somatic states triggered by the amygdala are short lived and habituate very quickly Bu¨chel, C., Dolan, R. J., Armony, J. L., et al (1999) Secondary inducers trigger somatic states via the ventromedial prefrontal cortex from perceived or recalled mental images – and these are the two ways in which behavioural schemata can be elicited. While the amygdala is engaged in emotional situations requiring a rapid response, i.e. ‘‘low-order’’ emotional reactions arising from relatively automatic processes. LeDoux, J. (2000), the ventromedial prefrontal cortex is engaged in emotional situations driven by thoughts and reflection. Once this initial amygdala emotional response is over, ‘‘high-order’’ emotional reactions begin to arise from relatively more controlled, higherorder processes involved in thinking, reasoning and consciousness . Schneider, W. & R. M. Shiffrin. (1977) Unlike the amygdala response, which is sudden and habituates quickly, the ventromedial prefrontal cortex response is deliberate, slow, and lasts for a long time. Thus the prefrontal cortex helps predict the emotion of the future, thereby forecasting the consequences of one’s own action”. Somatic states can be induced from (1) primary inducers and (2) secondary inducers Damasio H (1995) Primary inducers are innate or learned stimuli that cause pleasurable or aversive

states. Once present in the immediate environment, they automatically and obligatorily elicit a somatic response. The actual encounter of a drug by an addicted individual is an example of a primary inducer Shiv, B., Loewenstein, G. Bechara, A. Damasio, H. et al (2009). Secondary inducers, on the other hand, are entities generated by the recall of a personal or hypothetical emotional event, i.e. ‘‘thoughts’’ and ‘‘memories’’ of the primary inducer, which elicit a somatic response. The recall or imagination of a drug experience by an addicted individual is one example of a secondary inducer (Bechara et al., 2003). “For example, if we see an elderly person, perceptual features such as hair color or body posture may activate specific elements in the impulsive system (see Figure 2). Because such elements have previously been paired with other features that are correlated with advanced age, a whole cluster of elderly features will be activated.” For example, (as shown above) the “concept of slowness may become activated in the impulsive system and reflect our direct or indirect experiences with elderly people. Although the connections between elements in the impulsive system do not carry a truth value and do not reflect declarative knowledge about elderly people being slow, the associative link between elderly and slow may bias perception and influence behavior if it is activated… Thus, the impulsive system can be understood as a system of experiential primacy, in which affective and nonaffective feelings are generated quickly and without syllogistic processes of inference. Whereas the logical-Prefrontalreflective system is very different Strack, F. & Deutsch, R. (2002:224)

As shown “The reflective system generates declarative knowledge by assigning perceptual input to a semantic category… An important feature of representations in the reflective system is that they can be flexibly generated and changed. Thus, the reflective system can solve a multitude of tasks, such as reasoning, planning, or mental simulation” Strack, F. & Deutsch, R. (2002:225) For example; I have just imagined for a moment the idea of going to the shop and buying a Redbull; which is a caffeinated energy drink; I imagined the idea of drinking it and then as a result being perfectly awake and being able to continue with the writing of the book. I forgot about this thought for a moment, and then continued writing only to discover that suddenly my writing seemed slower, and duller, and I seemed less inspired than a few moments prior to the Redbull imagining. How are these emotional-Mental-Schematas formed? After a somatic state has been triggered by a primary inducer and experienced at least once, a pattern for this somatic state is formed. For example, recalling or imagining the experience of a drug re-activates the pattern of the somatic state belonging to the actual previous encounter of that drug. However, the somatic state generated by the recall or imagination of using a drug (secondary inducer) is usually fainter than one triggered by an actual use of that drug (primary inducer). Walter , H. (2002) It’s important to note that activation of behavioural schemata may be automatically activated when there is enough impulse a result of deprivation (of food for example). With the example of food if you were on an island and you have no food, it wouldn’t be long before you start eating plants and licking the mould off rocks. Strack, F. Deutsch, R. (2004)

This means that it’s important to take into account that for a proper functioning reflective system to be present, one must not either be deprived, or be experiencing high levels of arousal (causing well-practiced dominant responses to occur impulsively). The reflective system operates most efficiently at immediate levels of arousal Hull, C. (1943). It should be briefly covered that Rosenthal a unconscious executive control theorist – i.e. one of the guys who mentions there are a great deal of executive processes that occur outside of awareness; states that he doubts that there is even really awareness altogether. He states the example of eyesight; for example in the room I am in there is a dog, the dog is always in my field of vision however the majority of the time I am unaware that I am aware of the dog. But regardless my ability to recognize patterns, and identify schemata is always present else when the dog begs for attention I would be unable to recognize that template of schemata. In the example of the dog merely being present, this is referred to by Rosenthal as a FOT (First Order Thought) meaning that the thought is already present although I’m unaware I’m having the thought that “a dog is present” and then in the example where I notice the dog is begging for food “The Dog is beginning for food” I’m now aware that there is a dog in the room, this is a SOT (second order thought) as I’m aware of something, then a third order thought would be me being aware that the dog isn’t just merely begging for food but I’m aware I’m thinking that the dog wants food. Causing a TOT (third order thought) This would mean that we are only conscious of mental states; when we have thoughts about those mental states. This reduces conscious awareness to a very tiny part of existence; but seems

like an important and accurate contributory comment in addition to the model outlined that describes the process of human choice. Dienes, Z. Perner, J.(2006) Various researchers have shown that our sense of free will is very complicated. And isn’t as simple and clear cut so far as to whether we do or don’t have some amount of choice for at least some of our decisions. But one could argue that even if a single one of our thoughts or ideas, or actions were not our own then in fact we are just some form of robot carrying out the prescription of others or the environment. What has been demonstrated in this section is that imagined or real scenarios can be triggered either by executive control or automatically. In the later economics section we investigate how environmental conditions can influence our behaviour.

The Seduction Community “Successful seductions begin with your character, your ability to radiate some quality that attracts people and stirs their emotions in a way that is beyond their control. Hypnotized by your seductive character, your victims will not notice your subsequent manipulations. It will then be child's play to mislead and seduce them.” Greene, R.(2004:1) However it wasn't until Neil Strauss (2005) that seduction methods became a popular interest for millions of men. The book that created this movement was 'The Game' it blew previously a small elite community open to the public, with the author Neil Strauss successfully selling having his book featured across worldwide media, and the book placed at the top of the best seller tables.

This section of the book acts as a debate between the former ways of NLP seduction as taught by hypnotists such as Ross Jeffries the friendly Californian, and the newly popularized methods of tribe building and social status as taught by cool exmagician Erik von Markovik (more frequently known by his stage name 'Mystery'). Whether Hypnotic language or Social Leadership creates attraction is something that sparks rivalry between the 700 companies that offer to teach their own techniques on how to pick up girls. The relationship between Suggestive Language and Social Leadership is central to our discussion. Can you imagine yourself walking into a bar and announcing to friends and strangers that you are a pick up artist? As soon as people hear would they be shocked, amazed, or annoyed that your attempting to improve your results with the opposite sex. Perhaps you will be thought of as manipulative or clever for devising such a sneaky device to capture the hearts of women. Or maybe you'll worry that you will be exposed or caught out in your efforts to improve your abilities to communicate. Although we might want to be hailed as the ultimate king of mind control, or think of pick-up-advice being clever patterns that we might expect in a science fiction novel covering the brainwashing techniques of the U.S government, the advice usually just consists of general tips and tricks that many young men and women consider common-knowledge. Few of us would be surprised to learn, that we most prefer to agree to the requests of those people we like. And this is what the seduction community attempt to teach; how to get people to like you. However, in the pursuit of becoming the most attractive & convincing guy in the club, many of us have our

own self-judgments that limit us, in going out and delivering these techniques in a well formed manner. Many men feel very uncomfortable when approaching women or retaining any social contract with strangers. You ought to put an end to that today. If you want to turn out to be truly influential and powerful in your social interactions you’re going to have to overlook that fear of rejection. You must assume your responsibility for making a social contract with strangers.

General Attraction Triggers Many of us overlook the important tips and tricks that we once knew that made us King of every social situation, yet still have the desire to get out the house and bump into intellectually and expressively interesting people. The politest way to view the seduction community is a network of people who are looking to prepare each other to keep in mind the seduction tactics that many popular guys find natural. What are the components that cause a person to be fond of and be fascinated to a person over someone else? Before we get into how to flirt with people and make them attracted to you. Let’s place our minds back to what actions girls take when they are trying to seduce you. Think back to the last time a girl tried it on with you? Got one? Maybe you did, but maybe you can’t remember one. This shows us two things, I) that girl’s don’t make the first move with guys that often. And II) If you did think of a time and how the girl tried it on with you, it probably wasn’t that bad an approach and made you feel good about yourself.

Researcher Monica Moore wanted to investigate the general attraction triggers between men and women. She wanted to note the exchanges between men and women when a woman was trying to seduce a man. So Monica Moore and her team of researchers observed 200 women at a party. They noticed various non-verbal solicitation signals. Every time they saw a repetition of a signal they tallied a score. Here is a list of the frequency they saw each attraction solicitation signal in descending order of frequency. “Smiled at him broadly – 511 times” “Throw him a short darting glace – 253 times” “Dance alone to the music – 253 times” “Looked straight at him then flipped their hair - 139 times” “Keep a fixed gaze on him – 117 times” “Looked at him, tossed their head, then looked back – 102 times” “’Accidentally’ brushed up against him – 96 times” “Nodded their head at him – 66 times” “Point to a chair and invite him to sit down – 62 times” “Tilted their head and touched their exposed neck – 58 times” “Lick their lips during eye contact- 48 times” “Tapped his buttocks – 8 times” Leil Lowndes (1997) These techniques were used by women who were witnessed to be successful at attracted men using these techniques. But many of these techniques are similar to what we are going to advise

throughout this attraction section of the book; we are just going to give them a broader context. By taking into account the techniques girls use on you, to make you attracted to them. You will be able to notice quickly, next time you are surrounded by women, who is attracted to you and who is not, chances are you didn’t notice in the past. Once you make a start to using the techniques outlined in this book you will unexpectedly find that plenty of girls are interested in you. By learning what women do now you’ll be able to spot when they are attracted to you while your displaying your social etiquette.’ Let’s discuss what makes an attractive guy. Have you ever met the type of guy, who seems to have relentless energy, perhaps you know someone from work who always seems to be smiling and helpful come rain or shine. Its amazing how the skill to be positive, and fun can engage people. Neil Strauss (Author of the game 2005, p67) writes “your energy level should be equal to or slightly higher than the woman or group you’re approaching. Most people are out to have fun. So if you can add to their fun, you'll be welcomed into the group” This advice is supported by psychologist, Peter Borkenau from Bielefeld University he revealed that happy people use different language, and body expressions to unhappy people. (Richard Wiseman: 2009, p35) He found that happy people use a greater frequency of positively charged words such as 'love', 'like', and 'fond') and lower frequency of self-references such as 'me', ' 'myself' and 'I') have a larger variation in the pitch of their voice and speak

slightly faster. If we can mimic the things that positive people do, we can increase how responsive women are to our requests. “Suppose you ask a woman out, and she asks what night works for you. Look at the difference between these two responses: “Oh any night of the week works. All I really do is sit at home and watch TV most nights anyway.” “Wednesday night works best for me. I could actually go out Tuesday evening, but it would have to be later because I’m playing racquetball after work. Or we can grab lunch Thursday, but at night I’m grabbing dinner with some friends”. (Steve Fate, Steve Reil: 2002, p35) Look at the dissimilarity between these two answers. The first conveys to the woman that you have undeniably no life, which is very unattractive to women. – The second shows that your positive, upbeat, interesting and people like to be around you. This communicates that you’re attractive. In 2007 a seduction book was released and caused many readers to feel quite shocked! It offered techniques to hypnotize women during a conversation and make them feel negative associations towards other men, and experience positive associations towards you. This method is scientifically questionable as its frequently been shown that by using negative emotions such as fear and anxiety as a motivating factor in selling often causes 'decision paralysis' negative associations lead to an inability to be experimental and playful with the world, a piece of research by S. Jones (1965) With regards to being fun Mystery writes in Mystery. Odom, C. Strauss, N. (2007’s the Mystery Method, he writes“Be a fun and

playful person, be challenging to women, be slightly unpredictable, embrace your passions, and develop your social circle.” by focusing on building social circles both in the short term a single evening, and over the long term a friendship group seems a more effective way to motive people to want to be with you then making them feel negative about portions of their life. “When at a party whatever you do don’t stand in a corner. Be sure to mingle and flirt with as many people as possible. There’s nothing to fear because people will be friendly and rejections are rare unless you make a fool of yourself” Don Diebal (1991) Building social value became a predominant theme in PUA (the seduction community) after the publication of The Game, it is based on the concept of social proof. The research into social proof has found that people look to their peers in order to establish how to act, and who's attractive. For example, nearly everyone who enters a library does so quietly, without knowing why, they simply have copied what the situational cues have indicated and used this as a basis on how to act. We build these situational cues to establish, the normal way of evaluating unfamiliar elements “Norms or beliefs about how one should or is expected to behave in a given situation can exert a powerful influence on behaviour” (Fishbein and Ajzen: 1975) for example “Research shows that women rate a man as more attractive after they've seen another woman smiling at him or having a good time in his company” Wiseman, R. (2009) Relativity is (relatively) easy to understand. We find it difficult to judge things on their own. The value of things is defined by their surroundings. If we walk into a digital camera shop, we might assume that the $2,000 dollar camera is the one of the highest quality. And suppose they outline the cheapest model to

be $160. We then decide to buy a camera somewhere between those two prices thinking that $160 represents the lowest of quality, when in reality you can order plenty of good digital cameras off the internet for $70-80. Or suppose you’re on a date with a lovely girl, you decide to go to a nice Italian restaurant somewhere in Soho. You both take a seat, and across comes the waiter, with the wine menu! And you need to decide what bottle of wine to splash out on.... there’s really expensive wines on the bottom of the list, and really cheap on the top. You don’t want to look cheap, and you don’t want to look like you don’t appreciate quality, so you hurriedly decide to have the second cheapest wine! Restaurant owners know that we think like this, so they more often than not raise the price of the second cheapest wine, and reduce the quality, thereby making them the highest profit. What if you are a single person, not in a relationship of any sought, and hope to appeal to as many attractive potential dating partners as possible at an upcoming singles event? What should you do? Dan Ariely's advice is to bring a friend who has your basic physical characteristics (similar coloring, body type, facial features), but is slightly less attractive than you (-you) (Dan Ariely: Predictably Irrational) Researchers have recently shown that personality-relationship factors between the agent and yourself as a mate are not the only factors at work when attempting to attract a partner. All our relationships have a broader social & strategic context; that is to

say, we may not be the only one competing for the affections of the girl. Just think about the guy, who follows a girl wherever she goes, who turns up on her doorstep with flowers. Yet the girl runs a mile. He phones her but she doesn’t answer the call… personality factors such as being nice… or attempting to relate to someone doesn’t necessarily work without considering the broader context. And even if the girl is lonely and has no one competing for her affections, her memories of previous competitors are used to compare the value of your attempts. “Tactics of mate attraction that manipulate the cues to dominance and status will be judged most effective when used by men in the context of short-term mate competition. We predicted, therefore, that self-promotion tactics signaling high levels of dominance and status will be judged most effective for men in the short-term mating context. Derogation of a competitor's dominance and status will also be judged most effective for men in the short-term mating context.” Schmitt,D. Buss, D.(1996) Instead of the needy guy, conjure up a guy who smiles, who’s energetic and on cloud nine being animate in his life. The whole world seems to know him. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry is smiling around him; he’s forever congratulated on being so well styled and happy. An approach that I see work for a large number of young guys is plainly make relations with as many people as possible, and appear positive and upbeat throughout. These guys look at people and genuinely glow a smile, they give direct eye contact.

When the girl and the guy make eye contact, she might turn away but when she turns back you’re sure you’ve got her. Everyone’s shy, but by holding someone’s gaze you can really get them feeling great about themselves and attracted to you. In mystery’s method, he describes walking around the clubs with the biggest smile on your face. This sounds crazy! We can all debate whether that really works, but a smile is contagious. When you see someone else smile you can’t help but smile yourself. Even if you just think they are silly mug you still want to have a conversation with them regardless about how physically unattractive or unstylish they might be, you still want to chat to them. Instead of a needy guy who is attempting to push his affections onto a girl, this guy lets the world watch. While he just lives to the best of his abilities, he sees opportunities constantly, and is just happy to meet people regardless of where there from or what they do. In this situation it’s a social norm for everyone to believe they're attractive! Success breeds success! And by gaining a few small supporters it can quickly become an epidemic. Socially accepted rules, like who's attractive and who's not. “Can be so strong and so universally held that virtually everyone in that situation behaves the same regardless of his or her attitude” Brock, T. Green, M (2005) To build social proof we need quick ways of generating curiosity from all around us! Perhaps we could look to celebrities and how they do it.

Jonny Depp in Pirates of the Caribbean dressed in a very eccentric way! We often hear people say that they preferred his performance in that film compared to any other films they’ve seen of him. When we see something that is a bold clear statement, something memorable we tend to focus on that thing and ignore the rest. The bright lighting in the pirates of the Caribbean, his clear outline of clothing and makeup in combination with his character form a whole concept for us to perceive.

Peacock Theory Professional seducers call this skill of spawning a persona that causes everyone else to look, Peacocking. If you’ve ever been to a pick up artist conference you will see gangs of young men kitted out with enormous 70’s style medallions. Showing off Hats with feathers and fur coats draped down to their pointy Cuban heels. These seducers mostly claim that the way they dress is one of the ultimate tips on how to seduce. Can we take their claims seriously? They believe, by dressing outlandishly… isn’t to impress an individual person your speaking to. They often admit the outfits look ridiculous. Instead they believe that dressing in such a way creates a social effect, causing everyone to stop and stare at you. Which makes you seem like the most important person in the room, by comparison to the lack of interest among everyone else. It’s an interesting theory. But how could such an effect work in seduction in the daytime. Suppose we wanted to go to coffee shops and the high street and attract pretty girls, would dressing outlandishly benefit us there?

Perhaps the social effect would be lost by the lack of a consistent group of people. This in turn sparks debate as to where is the most effective location to practice your newly acquired skills i.e. when you go out and practice the persuasion/seduction skills you have learnt where is the best place to go out and acquire the results of your new found talent. Should you go to nightclubs, or bars? Or should you spend time getting to know people in coffee shops and the streets in the day? Perhaps if we go to the bars it might have been too easy to get girls anyway because they are drunk! And then we haven’t learnt anything? Or perhaps it’s best to practice in the day that way we can hear what the other person is saying etc. but what if there is no one there, or they don’t want to speak because they are not in the mood? Maybe we should remind ourselves of what we want to achieve… if we are really trying to do what we intended, “Get more & hotter girls” then perhaps that means we should go to the busiest places. If you think of nightclubs and bars, think of the long queue outside of people desperately waiting to get inside and get a drink! Imagine the bouncers trying to let only the hottest and most socially adequate people in. Everyone’s dressed to the hilt, looking and feeling their best and there’s hundreds to thousands of them, socializing, dancing, looking to meet new people who they’ve never met before.

No one wants to get dressed up, wait in line, pay high drinks prices, to be trapped in a noisy room, and listen to someone else’s music choice. But that’s exactly what millions of single people across the world do every day! All these party-goers, could have just as easily, drank cheap drink, and listened to their own music choice, in the comfort of their own home... the only difference is, random strangers! Everyone is looking for people who make their lives more full, more interesting. Therefore, it could be said that if you want to practice social skills like influence, hypnotism, or seduction the best place to practice is where there is the most people who you can quickly get into conversation with. The general public in the day may possibly just be running between coffee and the office. Or having a quick shop before they go home, they aren’t necessarily in the mood or used to speaking to strangers at this time of day. When they go out later or at the weekend they will be and then you can work on the social factors that cause you to be attractive.

Entourage Gaming In a busy venue, originating social power means ‘giving value to a venue’. This is all about being the most fun person in the room! And giving the impression that you are somewhat a leader in one or many of the various social circles. It’s been shown by a piece of research that those individuals in nightclubs etc. who appear to be at the center of social circles, even if they aren't actually even necessarily part of the group

they appear to be surrounded by, will be rated significantly more attractive than their 'non surrounded' counterparts. A study that shows this was investigated by Psychologist Priya Raghubir And Ana Valenzuela. They analyzed thousands of episodes of the television quiz show the weakest link. In the show contests stand in a semi-circle, and answer questions about general knowledge, then contestants get to vote off other contestants at the end of each round. The contestant in the center of the semi-circle, won the game 45% of the time! (meaning that they weren't voted off by other competitors) P. Raghubi; and, A Valenzuela (2006) as seating positions were assigned by random, this means that it had little to do with the intelligence or the personality of the people standing there. Yet the social effect was massive! To create this kind of effect (Often called Entourage Gaming by the seduction community) where those around us will inherently like us, and girls to be attracted to us, means that you take a social situation and to try to become the leader of it, one method to do this could be; to make an effort to greet everyone who enters the venue, the benefits of such an action can pay off exponentially, as it typically means that everyone in the club knows you more than they know any other stranger so frequently their mind runs to you, and you will find yourself surrounded by lots of people which only attracts interest from more people. Bring to mind the girl that slipped away… that one you couldn’t catch, and the more you tried to pursue her, the more distant she turn out to be! Damn, you wanted that girl so bad. You might wonder, why do we always want the things we can’t have?

We all desire things that are in a great deal of demand, but are in short supply. Seduction advice is an attempt to change that! Rather than to do the typically thing and pursue the girls we want without any kind of sense of a plan. We instead focus on being valuable and appealing to others. In this scenario, you create environment where everyone perceives you as attractive and you suck her into it! Research into supply and demand shows us that, humans find things in high demand to be more attractive, when compared against objects/people who they could easily acquire because of the lesser competition for them. If you think about it this makes a great deal of sense, consider the lack of diamonds or gold but how many people desire them for no real reason. According to the theory, the more on display an item is, (i.e. shown to the widest possible audience) while at the same time being only possible to acquire by a select few, the more desirable that item (or person) will be. Evolution explains that , when individuals live in groups, they compete with each other for valuable resources. Competition among members of the same species for reproductively relevant resources is the cornerstone of Darwin's (1859) theory of natural selection Eberhard, M.(1975). Whenever the interests of two individuals donot coincide, competition can ensue Buss, D. (1989) A study by Stephen Worchel, at the university of Hawaii demonstrated that biscuits that are consumed from a jar that is

almost empty are significantly more tasty in the mind of the consumer compared with biscuits consumed from a full jar. I’ve had numerous conversations with guys who ask me to help them get their ex-partner back, or how to help them get with their high school sweetheart. They’ve told the girl numerous times that they are attracted and that they really want to be with the girl, but they keep getting turned down. They ask me, “What should I do to get with that girl?” The answer I have to tell this is surely a bit of a disappointment. By being attracted to one girl and her clearly knowing about it, makes her feel precious and special and that she’s important and in demand and that your unattractive to anyone, and that no one wants you. It makes you lack value. “Dwelling on one particular girl, and relying on her for your happiness in life – before you’re actually in a relationship with her – is deadly. Successful men are busy with their own lives, and while happy to spend their time with women, are not always available due to other commitments.” Fate,J. Reil, S. (2003) The results from the cookie study is in line with the writings of Mystery one of the popularizes of the 2005 onwards seduction community, he states “Women are searching for a man whose reality is more fun and valuable than their own. You must be congruent with the value that you have to offer, and it be apparent to the room” Mystery. Odom, C. Strauss, N. (2007) Its been shown that when a guy is shown to be a leader of men, a protector of love ones, and in demand by women then he is rated much more attractive in studies than his less socially in demand counterpart. Wiseman, R. (2009)

There is a great deal of PUA advice that mentions the concept of inner game what they mean by this is that by being a confident person you don't have too much concern about being negative, you simply think in positive ways and see the universe as a place of abundance. Every year thousands of guys go on Seduction Bootcamps, where they train in methods like those mentioned on how to get girls! I've heard hundreds of students complain that they haven't been with a girl in months or years, and they explain that they don't know why?! And then you later on in the discussion ask them what they do about it? and the typical anything is “nothing”. These are often, young intelligent guys who maybe at some point in their lives did OK with girls, and then have forgot the method, or for others they never have had any success, and its like other guys have all the luck. On seduction bootcamps, guys often complain when the trainer pushes them to speak to girls, the guy may say “Yeah, I would speak to her... but I don't fancy that kind of girl” or another common one is “I don't like going into busy places”. These two self limitations, are absolute game killers, its impossible to move on with them. The aim, is to be the most fun guy in the room.. and to be open and free with everyone you meet. Self-judgements like the ones above, take away the fun! And stop you being flirty!

Inner game Neil Strauss the author of the 2005 book 'The Game’ writes, “Always have something better to do than meeting women. As

soon as you start staring at, evaluating, or ogling a woman in front of you, even if she can't see you, you've just lost every woman behind you.... you don't seem interesting, fun or worth meeting” Neil Strauss (Rules of the game) The concept of Inner game assumes that if you achieve a confident mind-set that you will show more attractive body language. For example, smiling has been shown to increase the attraction rating by evaluators in a series of research studies by various researchers. Mystery Writes that by “learning back and speaking with authority you increase your attractiveness by 300%” Mystery; (2010) Another example of really good body language is to lift your head slightly so that your chin is pointing slightly into the air. This conveys that your positive and upbeat and proud of yourself subtly. Although there are few resources that prove these assumptions on body language, the assumption is that if you could combine all the data that involves getting your body language and language performed in a persuasive manner you should have dramatically more impressive results than those individuals who have no theoretical grounding in such skills.

Supply and demand Create interest from people first! Is a core recommendation of the seduction community. Being interested in other people can sometimes look as if you don't have supply and demand in your favor. When you've built interest then attraction, then she is ready to have you tell her that you’re interested in her she will be prime to reciprocate the compliment.

We all are suckers for compliments “What should you compliment on? Just about anything; their necklace, perfume, eyes, shoes, watch, bracelet, hat, scarf, hair, the color of their shirt.” Fate,J. Reil, S. (2003:24) As long as you say compliments sincerely they will be treated with a genuine positive response. Don’t go overboard but you should be complimenting nearly everyone you meet on just one thing! That way your communicating that you’re paying attention to the person you’re talking to. Providing you’re not conveying that you’re interested in someone, without them being un-attracted to you, then a compliment is never a bad thing. This is why as a rule many seducers recommend that you combine a compliment with some indication that you’re not actually sexually interested, or saying the compliment for any ulterior motive. Before we give people too much attention we need to be sure that they are reeled into us. Where they become highly interested, to hear what you have to say, you give them a brief compliment and then push them back away until they come forwards to hear what you have to say again. This is known as push and pull technique in popular attraction psychology. When you compliment a girl, don’t compliment physical traits. This comes across insensitive. And that you’re not actually accounting for socially attractive factors which are way more important than physical characteristics.

This concept is that whenever you give a compliment to someone it must be both indicating your interest in that person but also indicating your disinterest (i.e. that you’re not directly complimenting that person because you think they are better than you) thereby maintaining your power as the leader of the group. This can be a difficult dichotomy to reconcile in the mind of a new seducer or persuader, because on one hand you need to be open and exposed to everyone, the person in the room who draws in the most attention but on the other hand you need to be unavailable.

Psychology of Seduction This concept, of waiting for interest from others before responding with your own interest and then taking it away again, has gained scientific support from various researchers, for example Hadfield conducted a series of interviews in order to determine the best way to be to attract a sexual partner, through these conversations it came out that the importance lies in demonstrating that you are in high demand but being very clear that you have chosen the person your speaking to. Hatfield, E. Rapson, R. (1988) Worchel, S., Lee, J., and Adewole, A. (1975) Social Proof could be considered a method to indicate attractive qualities about yourself without having to list them. It’s an illustrative way of presenting that you’re an interesting person without having to brag about yourself. It’s illustrative of your value rather than you describing it. You can easily build interest from a girl, by speaking in positive terms, about yourself, about others and about life in general, you will have her admire you for being such a happy fun person, who she wants to be around.

Research to support this has been carried out by John Skowronski (1998) from Ohio University at Newark. He investigated the downside of spreading gossip, but also the upside of applauding and speaking positively about the social scene around you. Participants in the study watched videos of actors talking about a third party (a friend or acquaintance of the actor) in a negative light such as “he hates animals, today I saw him kick a puppy out of his way” afterwards the participants were asked to rate the personality of the actor, regardless of the fact that the speaker was criticizing someone else for somewhat unethical actions the audience still rated that they didn't like the speaker or find him at all attractive. Wiseman (2009:57) These can often be called “Third Party compliments. This means complimenting people who are not present. Most the time when you hear two people talking about someone, they are saying negative things about that person. Women will be extremely impressed and appreciate the fact that your not only don’t say derogatory things behind their backs, but instead have positive things to say about them.” Fate,J. Reil, S. (2003) You know when you’ve got a girlfriend, and all of a sudden all these girls magically appear. All of which immediately state they are attracted to you and would very much like to be with you. Where do they suddenly come from? Where were they during the past year when you were single constantly looking for someone to spend time with. We’ve shown that been surrounded and looking interesting attracts people. But does been seen with girls make other girls, jealous and thus want to be with you?

The seduction community seems to think so. This is referred to as ‘Jealously Plotline’ and it was developed after many seducers found themselves being more sort after when having a girlfriend. Women seem to rate attractiveness of a potential mate based on how in demand they are to other females. Therefore seducers will often surround themselves with a female audience and never appear to pay too much interest to any one girl to the audience, yet every girl is under the impression that they have a special relationship with the seducer. Various studies have shown the effectiveness of social proof on ratings of attractiveness. To create this kind of ‘effect’ where you appear to be in demand from females, simply requires a bit of stage management. Where you stand, who you speak to, who’s watching you when you speak to them. One method of creating this jealously effect is to simply lean against a wall, or sit down while someone is speaking to you, leaving them locking you in to that position. That way it will appear that your surrounded by girls who are standing up trying to speak to you, while you appear laid back as if being in this much demand is a day-to-day experience for you. So far we have covered ‘how gain peoples interest’ and how to socialize in a group situation, according to the seduction community and relevant research. By building social proof, in these ways your likely to be more persuasive and listened to when you speak.

Now we’d like to move on slightly; so we can explore, “How to speak to the girl, and her friends”. Even for the ultimate player, when speaking to a girl they really like, they have no choice but to feel excited, blush and lose their intelligence! It happens to the best of us. To worry about that, is to be human. There are a number of tips that make it a lot easier to overcome any sense of self-doubt. When we speak, we should always work towards trying to become the leader of the social group, as Researcher Charlan Nemeth et al explains that a person who plays devil advocate will be much less effective at promoting these new ideas amongst group members compared with someone who is a majority member of the social group is more likely to be taken on board. (I feel like this needs expanding) This means, when attempting to speak to a girl you like, its important first to speak to her friends and surrounding colleagues before speaking to her. Once we are established as interesting, and are becoming somewhat a group leader. Then its important to focus on the relationship between yourself and the girl your trying to attract. This is referred to as the comfort stage. It involves using the persuasion skill of commonality. Commonality is a skill you’ve used many times before! It’s when we imply we are similar to our audience. You’ve probably heard the phrase “People like people like them”

There is some truth in that phrase! Car sales people tend to claim they’ve got a sister who lives in the place you’re from or that they own a car just like the one you’re looking at. We apply it to demonstrate that we are much the same as them. This makes it easy for the person to understand and recognize the things we assert, thanks to the content being relevant to them. In persuasion this allows us, to relate their reality to a suggested reality that we are persuading them into. A good example of creating commonality in the seduction community is the use of situational openers these are opening statements you make about the environment that connect you and the female that you wish to speak to so you are both 'reading from the same hymn sheet' so to speak. For example “its cold in here, isn't it? Hey... I've been thinking about something, maybe you could give me a perspective on this”

Creating commonality Creating commonality, i.e. through an opener can be extremely effective at allowing you to then get someone to be compliant i.e. to mimic your beliefs, attitudes and behaviours, and therefore oblige to your following requests. Researcher, Ellen Langer et al tested this concept, Langer arranged a stranger to approach someone waiting in line to use a photocopier and simply ask, 'excuse me, I have five pages. May I use the Xerox machine?” faced with this direct request to cut ahead in the line, 60% of people agreed to allow the stranger to go ahead of them. When the stranger followed the request with a reason “'May I use the Xerox machine, because I am in a rush' almost everyone 94% complied. One might think that the reason actually relating to

the circumstance is important but it has being shown that just the connection between the current scenario and giving a reason why it could be another way causes a response in almost everyone to comply. In one study they found that the features that induced attraction (cf. Cate & Koval, 1983). were physical attractiveness, geographical proximity, attitude similarity, and personality complementarity lead to greater romantic attraction between individuals Cattell, R. B., & Nesselroade, J. R. ( 1967 ); Eckland, B. ( 1968 ); Winch, P. (1990)

Rapport Building Your current response to listening to women telling you all of their problems might be to look for the nearest exit and run away! “Because the only reason you were listening in the first place was likely because she is a gorgeous girl. You would never listen to an ugly girl complain. While this reaction to listening to a beautiful woman’s problems is nothing more than male instinct it’s time to change your behavior. by actually listening to all girls. Next time a woman discusses her problems with you, don’t just act like your listening, but genuinely listen. Listen to every word she says. Ask more questions to demonstrate your interest. And, more importantly, match her emotion.” Part of the process of creating commonality is to listen to the words that people use and then to repeat them back; this is a method called Mirroring or building Rapport which is a technique that came from the late 1970's NLP movement. We all seem to like to hear our own words back and this convinces us that we are consistent and whatever is said next by the person speaking to us relates to us directly but also even if it

is a slight extension of what we are saying at least it directly relates to our own self of existence, a piece of research by Rick Van Baaren et al (2003) shows this, it shows that when food servers repeated back the order of the customers without any nice-ness the repeating back of the order alone pushed up the tips received by 70%. Emotion matching is important to pacing someone’s reality. “By matching a woman’s mood, whether happy or sad, she feels emotionally connected to you. If a woman’s telling a sad story, respond with; “Awww I’m really sorry to hear that”. If a woman is complaining about something, show her you understand: “Yeah I know what you mean” If a woman is telling a happy story, get happy with her. “Wow that’s incredible! What did you do?”. Fate,J. Reil, S. (2003) Once we’ve used our words and body language to communicate that we are similar to the girls (and boys) we are speaking to. Then we can lead their realities, by relating persuasive messages directly to them. We are not just trying to copy their body language, but we are attempting to get them to mimic us as a soft compliance test to see if they are following our social proof, by leading them to mimic body language that signals feelings of attraction, we cause

them to feel those feelings. One example of this is; Eye contact with the opposite sex. Eye contact has been consistently shown to lead to feelings of attraction and in many cases, love. Therefore technique that could be categorized as body language is the use of eye contact. A British scientist determined that, on average, when talking, people look at one another only 30 to 60 percent of the time. This is not enough to rev up the engine of love at first sight. Zick Rubin became fascinated about how to measure and create love! In his study “Measurement of romantic love” he found that people who were deeply in love gaze at each other much more when talking and slower to look away when someone intrudes in their world” Leil Lowdres: (1997:37) To give someone the feeling that the two of you are already in love (a self-fulfilling prophecy). Means dramatically increasing the eye contact between you both while the two of you are chatting. When you push up the eye contact so that you are doing this 75% of the time or more a chemical hormone called PEA is often released that is associated with the dilation of the pupils and an elated feeling of wellbeing. “While you’re cruising the nightclubs always keep that sexylooking gleam in your eyes. Literally try to melt women with your eyes. If you make eye contact with a woman, make sure that you give her a friendly smile and if close enough to you, simply say “Hi”. If you make eye contact with a woman across the way from you, and she turns away, don’t give up on her. Try to make eye contact again and smile at her. If she smiles back, approach her immediately” Don Diebel (1991: p21)

In one investigation exploring the links between eye contact and attraction, Richard Wiseman (2009) showed that when male and female participants were forced to stare into each other’s eyes for 2 minutes, their attraction rating of the other partner was six times higher than those who didn't engage in the staring exercise. The feeling of elation and attraction is further brought on by pupil dilation. It’s a two way process, when we are attracted to someone our pupils dilate, and we are attracted to people who have dilated pupils. Dr Eckhard Hess (1973), demonstrated that large pupils were more alluring by showing two pictures of a woman’s face to a group of men. The pictures were identical except, in one of them, Hess had retouched the lady’s pupils to make them larger. The male response to Ms. Big Pupils was twice as strong as to the identical woman with small pupils. Hess then reversed the experiment to perform it on women and they were twice as attracted to the larger male pupil’s also. We can’t control the physiological response of pupil dilation, it’s something that happens automatically when we are excited or interested in something. So when your engaging in eye contact with a girl be sure to focus on all the reasons you think she’s stunning, smart and kind and you’ll get big pupils sure to attract her in response. Most guys when they talk to women, they just stare in one place or down at the floor. If they do so accidentally catch the eye of a woman they look away as quickly as possible and let it go at that. The most successful guys at getting girls and persuading others, flirt with as many people as they can! Whether its guys or girls!

By doing this you’ll have a lot more fun and you’ll find everyone will be romantically attracted to you.

Sharing secrets & suggestion It has also been shown that the Sharing of secrets or a shared metaphorical reality is a method that can quickly cause the two people who engage in the process together to fall in love. In the seduction community a routine called 'accelerated reality' where you joke about what it would be like if you had a house and kids, and what they would look like causes the participant engaging in the imagining to feel as if that reality could be possible and then theoretically fall in love with you. Another example of such a accelerated reality could be the idea of going on a holiday or traveling. I learn't about the importance of sharing of secrets, suggestion in seduction from an interesting story that happened on my first evening of partying ever! I wasn't the most popular guy in school, I was 14, and felt like a geek. In anticipation of finally being able to go out and attract girls (our former boys school only had 3-4girls in her year group), I had read 'Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus'. It suggested different people liked different colors. So I decided this would be an interesting opening story with girls. We entered Emporium Nightclub, one of the busiest UK superclubs of the late nineties early 20's. Amongst the smoke, and lights of the nightclub, I saw a girl look at me, so I walked over and said “What’s your favourite colour” “Purple” she replied “Cool, my favourite colour is yellow, you know like the sun, or a beach, really happy things... I read in a book that colours mean something, and that people are attracted to people who like

yellow, because we are all attracted to the sun”. (Saying this while pointing to myself) That night using that line I kissed 13 girls and within two weeks I had lost my virginity. Within the next months I had kissed hundreds of girls using that line. Only today knowing what I know about attraction, sharing, and suggestion does my beginners luck make any sense. Psychologist Arthur Aron investigated what occurred when such sharing conversations occurred. What is the factor that causes such silly exchanges to create attraction? Could the act of disclosing personal information to another person make you feel especially close to that person? The research work of Aron, involved people who didn't know one another, and instructed to chat about increasingly private aspects of their lives. By asking each other a series of preset questions. - “If you could meet anyone in history who would it be?”, “Do you have a hunch about how and when your going to die?” finally progressing to “When did you last cry in front of someone” Richard Wiseman (2009:172) whether by forcing people to disclose personal information to another person could make you feel exceptionally close to that person, this research called The sharing game caused many of its participants to exchange phone numbers etc. and continue to meet after the study.

Kino Escalation During the comfort stage of the interaction there is a strong emphasis in seduction literature to increase the level of touch between yourself and the person your trying to build an intimate

relationship with, this is called Kino Escalation some writers mention that there is a sequence of places that could be recommended to touch before the interaction turns particularly imitate and that people should be touched roughly in this order. Its been frequently shown by researchers that when the level of touch increases, so does your attractiveness and persuasiveness, In a study by research psychologist N. Gueguen (2007) to test the effect of touch on persuasion and attraction, researchers approached a total of 240 women, told them they were really pretty, suggested going for a drink later in the day and asked for their telephone number. While another group approached 240 women told them that they were really pretty, suggested that they could go for drink later in the day and asked for their telephone number. The results in numbers for the first group received an average of 24 phone numbers, whereas the group who did a simple touch received an average of 48 phone numbers. It was shown that the probability of picking up a girl in the street increases by double if you touch her. Another study that shows that touching increases how attractive your rated and how likely your able to escalate with the opposite sex has been shown. Its amazing how effective touching someone on the upper arm for even just a second or two can have a surprisingly large effect on the amount of support they provide when it comes to helping you with a request. In one experiment N. Gueguen (2007) arranged for a man to approach 120 women in a nightclub over a 3 week period. The approach had the assistant say “Hello, my name is Antoine. Do you want to dance?” half the time the request was accomplied by a light touch on the top of the woman's arm and the other half involved no touch at the request stage.

In the nightclub, women accepted the request 65% of the time with a touch whereas only 43% without a touch. In one research experiment it was found that when the assistants went out into the streets and asked people for a dime a brief touch on the forearm increased the likelihood of getting the money by 20%. in another study, when experimenters asked for girls phone numbers in the street using the following introduction “Hey, your really pretty, it would be great to get your number” the chance of receiving the number went up from 1 in 10 to 1 in 5 when a touch was applied to the forearm of the agent. According to the seduction author Leil Lowdres (1995) Body language typically occurs in a sequence. Firstly there is an exchange of non-verbal cues that cause the initiation of the conversation. These might be smiling or initial mouthing of the word “hi”. Proximity to one another, and bumping into to one another. The second stage of body language is that two parties then begin exchanging in converse. One of them speaks initially and then they both begin chatting. Step three is turning. This after one parties begins the initial “Hi” the other one turns towards them. The approacher has the least power, and the approached makes the choice to turn as they see wish. Initially the turner might only turn their head to speak to the seducer. But as their sexual tension grows and they become more attracted to one another the level of touching increases and they begin facing torso to torso to one another and then their knees begin facing also. This gradual process of facing full on to one another is a gentle exchange that can easily be led through the

art of noticing where she is at and progressing your signals in order to encourage them from her.

Isolate the agent Typically seducers will find it easier to progress with a girl in new social situations away from her friends, so this means taking her from the venue or into a separate isolated space of the venue where you can speak to touch quietly and its comfortable and there isn't concern from friends or ex-partners etc, that is to say there is no social consequence, in the seduction community this changing of venue is called a bounce. The seduction community states that “The completion of the bounce represents that all goals have been achieved, or are about to be.” its important to pay attention to the order of advice, and not to leap ahead. All techniques must be used with compliance testing on responsive individuals who follow your lead and increase the levels of touch, sharing, commonality, and engagement with you. If you don't soft compliance test that she is moving with you and instead run patterns on her that she is not ready to receive, for example; insisting on going back to your house, or increasing your levels of touch, or exchanging secrets without earning your position to do so, you will be communicating interest without disinterest, you will be communicating that she is in demand, and you are in abundant supply, and as we shall discover is not a workable competitive advantage and is mathematically unrewarding in all areas of social life.

Persuasion Would you feel powerful if you could make anybody want to be your friend, and then get them to do anything you want? Robert

Calidni outlines weapons of influence that make people feel progressively more committed to the persuasive frames we place in front of them. This might mean we get people involved in a moment (consistency); we make it seem as if everyone is doing this thing (social proof), we relate the message to our audience (commonality), or we make it seem that you’ve got to get this thing now before you lose your opportunity (scarcity). What we would like to cover is ways in which you can be naturally persuasive. The impact you make through your interactions can have a beneficial effect for society and in turn increase the fruits you receive in this life. We really can be influenced to do anything (at least in theory) such as the things we witness stage hypnosis do on stage. A scary thought! … Wait, Isn’t Persuasion Evil? Obviously, the idea of using hypnotic-like persuasion to influence anyone to do anything; scares some people! Lets first discuss why.... Some of us, have strong religious values that we wouldn't want changed, some of us are in love with our partners and don't want to suddenly be in love with someone else. Some have political ideas they want to remain untouched, or company secrets they must keep hidden. Such hypnotic espionage isn't a concern. Many of us, don’t set out to persuade others. We tend to have the attitude “Live and let live” this mentality is that we do not feel we should actively persuade others according to our desires.

They say people should be able to do, think and feel the way they want to. Gulledge, A (2004) Nevertheless, people are undoubtedly influenced constantly by their surroundings. If you’ve ever communicated anything to anyone, then you’ve probably used persuasion techniques whether you realize it or not. And even if you haven’t communicated, you’ve remained silent, you’ve still communicated something. There’s plenty of people who’s living depends on persuading others to do and believe what we want, politicians convince us that their idea to produce spending cuts will benefit society, or that the tax they are placing is necessary in order to defend our kingdom. Some sales people claim that they can get any customer to buy anything. Regardless of price, its often stated that 20% of the salesman within a company make up 80% of the sales. Some guys really seem that they can have us what we believe whatever they would like. Con-men seem able to walk away with people's money, and the victims were completely convinced the man was doing them a favor. Typically describing him as seeming so kind, or nice. Magicians do magic tricks on us, where the trick is happening right before our eyes, yet we fail to notice the things that cause the magic to happen. Hypnotists on television seem to be able to convince people who look just like people we know, to dance around believing they are Michael Jackson, or forgetting their own names. What exactly is going on, and what do all these types of influence have in common? Modern research and perspectives

amongst various communities have solutions as to how we can become better at how to use social skills to our advantage. We all have things that we would like to sway others of. Perhaps it’s that girl we want to go on a date with us, or to make the job interviewer want to hire us, or an entire populace to feel compelled to purchase from our advertisements as a capitalist. When learning about social skills, one thing strikes me about people who train on courses and my own journey through this process is that often others don't perceive us to be quite as big clever or cool as we might hope. It’s like even our closest allies seem like they don't understand us. In many therapies, the therapist attempts to use the language of the client in order to represent the world in a way the client sees it, and therefore from there further delve into the issues that maintains their psychological distress. However this seems somewhat a trick, that the therapist is merely copying the client to pretend they understand when really they have no clue. This experience of 'being alone in this world' (Phenomenology) is a component of human life that we all learn to live with, but modern day research offers solutions that gets people motivated in your ideas and thus feel like they understand you. When we follow someone’s influence. It’s because, we believe it’s the right thing to do. We make a choice to change our mind about what we believe, about how we act, because we believe the new option is better than the old one. Perhaps, the idea that people can do things or change their mind so quickly is surprising! But your mind always firmly belonged to you, and always will.

People simply cannot be 'forced' to do anything. And people will only do and believe things that benefit them! Simon, H. (1978) People responding to persuasion, hypnosis, influence, social leadership and the like have no alternations in the brain that can be noticed, that is to say, there are no physiological signs that constitute an altered state. Weitzenhoffer, A. M. and Sjuberg, B. M. (1961); Brafman and Kirsch, (1999) Kirsch and Braffman, (2001.) People are perfectly conscious, awake, and make choices just as they always do. Subjects, sense involuntariness. But are not actually involuntary, Nash, Barnier (2008 :35) the subjects who sense involuntariness experience high levels of cognitive dissonance between the cross-compartment values, in their mind, and their sense of morals, ethics, and other rules about the world don't fit as closely as that of an impulsive happy go lucky person. When we persuade people, we allow people to see beyond their rules, and imagine anything! And the truth is, all of us on this planet are so similar that, if someone else can believe something, or do something, so can we! Subjects with high cognitive dissonance “ are no longer aware of their 'sense of effort' or the prior intention that normally accompanies a deliberate act... in the absence of awareness of their own intentions patients will experience their own thoughts and feelings as being caused, not by themselves but by some alien force” (Frith: 1992 ppp 114-115) Where you place your attention, is always towards things that interest you. It’s your mind working for your benefit, to reach higher utility.

Everyone is responsive to influence techniques, even though we might not feel like it. Persuasion author Kevin Dutton emphasizes this by saying “Our brains can be immobilized, like they’ve been infected with some kind of virus.” He told this to a friend, who told him this story; “Several years ago, I was at a workshop” said the friend. “It was held by an ex special forces martial arts instructor – He lined us up against a wall and told us to clasp our hands together – he told us “he was going to hack into our brains and hijack our free will – before you know it my hands were stuck together and I began worrying that my wallet was going to be taken Dutton,. K (2010, p204) These acts are common practice for a hypnotist, even more common for a magician who combines his misdirection skills with the art of social science. Suggestion is implying that something is likely to happen pushed forwards by an imagined idea that occurs automatically outside of our ability to conscious control it, even instructing someone’s arm to feel lighter by implying it’s tied to helium balloons will cause it to rise. If you’ve never done that routine I recommend you do that on someone today and you’ll have a much more in-depth understanding of the power of this book. So if everyone’s suggestible and isn't confined to some special state, then how do some guys convince others to do exactly what they want? You've probably had a friend, you know the person who always seems to get what they want, they've always seem to be popular, always have money and can just seem to get anything they want, how did they get all the luck? Many of us may resent those people thinking that they use people or that they aren't nice to anyone. There are several

reasons why these people do 'always seem to have all the luck' there are two important tactics that such people employ and will allow you to become a more likeable, compelling and ultimately 'lucky' person.

Reciprocity of favors As we aim to set out during the book, one of our goals is to understand why some people listen to us meticulously, hanging on our every word, and then communicating to them (providing we do it in the right manner) nearly always results in the outcome we desire with that person. In order to understand how we can get others to like us we cover a range of techniques, many of which have been pushed forwards and developed by the Professor; Robert Calidini, and he refers to them as his weapons of influence; the first one we cover is Reciprocity of favours. Many of us may recall from our own personal experience that often a little courtesy can go a long way, and that often when we do a small kindness for someone we can usually can get a little favour back. Perhaps you've had a friend and you've always wondered why they are offering you free things, doing small favours for you, but later on you find it difficult to separate yourself from them because you feel an affiliation. What if we could take someone who was a complete stranger and cause them to feel a strong bond with us and them to be completely grateful for the relationship rather than resentful. Benjamin Franklin (Born 1706), is world renowned for being a scientist and philosopher, amongst many other things. He was considered the inventor of bifocals, the odometer and the lighting rod. Throughout his life he had a fascination with persuasion, for example he had studied mesmerism and

genuinely believed that it turned people into robot like figures, who do exactly what you tell them. When Franklin was involved in politics, he had opposition from another gentleman, Franklin believed that if he could cause this man to like him then it would be greatly beneficial to his political ambitions. However this man hated Franklin. So Franklin knowing what he knows about the human disposition from his various research he hatched a plan. Franklin believed that the way to win people over was, he said “He that has once done you a kindness will be more ready to do you another, than he whom you yourself have obliged.” Therefore his plan to make this man into an ally went as followed, Franklin states “I did not, aim at gaining his favour by paying any servile respect to him. But instead took a method. I write a note to him expressing my desire of perusing a rare book in his library, and requesting he would do the favour of lending it to me. A few days later, he sent the book, and I returned in a week with another note, thanking him for the favour... Next time we met, he spoke to me, with great civility and manifested a reediness to serve me on all occasions. We became great friends.” (Cialdini et al: 2007, p73) According to psychologists there is a great deal of research into the use of favours to build relationships between strangers, contrary to many people's opinions that persuasion often involves forcing people to do things for us, its been consistently shown that by increasing your popularity and offering people favours can often pay off dividends if done in the right way. The research into persuasion shows that often with a small favour either committed for you by a stranger or on a stranger

can quickly lead them to buy-in to our beliefs/opinions afterwards. Many of us may be concerned that if we do a favour for someone, the favour we receive in turn might not be as valuable as the one we gave, therefore representing a loss, however the investigation into favours shows that when we help others, providing we have them reciprocate the favour early on, i.e. immediately after, they will deliver a favour of significant value. Psychologist Dennis Regan did a study to discover whether the favour people do in reciprocal is greater of lesser than the initial favour gave to a stranger; He gave a small can of coke to people in a venue, and then later on offered these individuals raffle tickets, he found the ones who received a can of coke compared to the ones who didn't bought twice as many raffle tickets despite the raffle tickets costing significantly more than the price of a can of coke which they didn't ask for. However despite there been consistent research showing that the favours we can receive are significantly larger than the ones we give out, many of us may recognize from personal experience that often we feel that we give more than we typically get. This may be for several reasons, for example the persuasive use of favours has been shown to work best for people who are strangers, This might be because its been shown that when the person the favour exchange occurs with suspects that you have an ulterior motive for engaging in the procedure that this tactic is shown to be ineffective.(D. T. Regan: 1971) and unless you quickly move in for a favour in reciprocal people typically forget the benefit you provided to their life bared any significance. As the research above shows if people suspect that there is an ulterior motive for the favour then the use of this tactic becomes

ineffective, however the benefits of such an activity isn't purely that people will more easily succumb to your requests, its been shown by various researchers than when people commit a favour for you it increases how highly they think of you, even if you hadn't committed any favour for them. When looking at the relevant research we discover one study by Psychologists Jecker, J. and Landy, D. (1969) when testing whether favour exchange increases your likeability they found that participants in their study who won money from an experimenter were willing to give back the money to the experimenter later on when he explained that he ran out of money, those people who did this rated the experimenter as much more likeable than the control group. Asking for a favour might seem like a lot to ask of someone who is a complete stranger to us, but the research shows that when people do a favour for you they nearly always rate that person much more likeable than they would rate someone else who didn't ask for a favour, its the general consensus within the seduction community that people value the effort they have put into a relationship, and therefore want to nurture and protect the time and energy they have invested, in the community often phrased as Time + Effort = Love. Meaning that when you put time and effort into something, whether it's a hobby, art, or a person you begin falling in love with that thing because of the effort you put in. “The greater the number of hoops someone has to jump through, the greater their commitment to the cause” Dutton, K.( 2010)

Building commitment When looking at how best to persuade people much of the research suggests that once you get people even slightly

emotionally, intellectually or imaginatively involved in a movement then its very difficult for them not to accept further participation into this brand. For example, according to Kevin Dutton (2010) successful retail salesman often ask for numerous forms of identity check before going through the details of a product. By them having you get out multiple forms of ID it makes the participant more committed to engaging the in the sales process with you, and therefore much more likely to buy! We've probably all had the experience of either being a child or witnessing a child use the following persuasive phrase in order to distance their allocated bedtime, When a child bargains for their bedtime the communication typically follows the same pattern, The Parent says “you have to go bed now” Child responds “Oh just a little bit longer”. Many members of the seduction community refer to this as 'staying in your frame' or maintaining an alpha frame an example of this might be when a seducer taking a girl to another location, Girl “Where are we going, I need to go home soon” Guy “Just a little bit longer, I want to show you something”. In various research studies investigating this its been shown that by having people get involved into a movement even slightly, later on makes them to commit to a lot more than they would have otherwise planned to commit i.e. simply pointing out to people that even a small offering/favour on someone's part would be acceptable and worthwhile is likely to be an effective strategy for getting people on-board to eventually commit to the entire activity. A Schroeder's (1976) study that shows this, research assistants asked for donations from homeowners for the American cancer society, they asked the residents 'would you be willing to help

by giving a donation?' for half of the residents the request ended there, for the other half the research assistant added, 'even a penny would help' the study showed that in the second example nearly double the people decided to participate and donate money to the charity, 50% of people compared with 26.8% All the research here has offered evidence that by first providing a gift, service or favour for someone we create a social-obligation in the recipient to reciprocate, or even better getting the individual to engage in a favour on your behalf we make you more likeable and increase the level of persuasiveness you have. There is something to be said about favours having a capacity to build relationships with people, because; if you do a favour for a stranger ,its likely they would want to return the favour, or vice versa therefore allowing the relationship to continue and progress. Although it might require a deal of bravery to speak to people on this level who you barely know, particularly someone who you would like to build a relationship with, the research shows that it nearly always pays off to make an effort and ask or give a favour to this person. It is often a strange phenomenon going in a library to notice that everyone in silent, and the only sounds you can hear are people turning pages of books, or typing. Or perhaps you've been on the underground during the 8am rush hour and realised how difficult it seems to talk to someone because everyone's heads are buried in newspapers or whatever work they are planning for the day. Different social situations seem to have unwritten rules, and almost automatically we seem to find ourselves obeying these rules without anyone having told us what they are.

We all take a great deal of cues from our external environment that later on cause us to build internal representations in terms of thoughts inside our minds, although events in the external environment might be entirely random and unconnected, for the purpose of 'creating rules' to build a useful way to interpret the world. In persuasion this is often referred to as Social Proof or Norm. For different circumstances humans seem to be magnetically attracted to conforming to the normal behaviour. When it’s a new scenario we are particularly hypersensitive to cues as to how to act. It’s suspected by some researchers that this is an evolutionary function to keep us safe. In Aarts, H. And A Dijksterhuis's (2003) study to test the effectiveness of indicating social norms to influence behaviour in people Psychologists changed the signs around a hotel in order to cause people to reuse their towels to cut down on hotel expenses in cleaning the towels, it was shown that “When a sign indicated that 95% of hotel users reused their towels” this caused 26% more people to reuse their towels, when compared against a more environmentally conscious reason for why to reuse towels. In a similar study that clearly stated that message was “Everyone who has stayed in this room has reused their towels = )” the result were that nearly everyone reused their towels. Our tendency to assume an action or thought is correct if others have it, is exploited in a variety of settings. Bartenders often “salt” their tip jars with a few pound coins and notes at the beginning of the evening in order to simulate tips left by prior customers and to give the impression that tipping is proper barroom behavior. Church users sometimes prime collection baskets, in order to show others that this is acceptable behavior.

The effectiveness of a norm increases even more so when you more closely allocate messages based on characteristics i.e. situational similarities with the audience your speaking to, the closer the commonality between marketing and the audience its attempting to reach, the higher its effectiveness.

Pacing and leading: Building Compliance. In Neuro-Linguistic programming the concept of stating information about someone that they immediately recognize to be true, and then connecting this with information you wish for that individual to accept is true is called Pacing and leading The assumption is that if you say “Hey, you look like you'll be good at this, wait before we start, could I borrow your phone I just need to phone my friend” then the participant is more likely to respond to your request. The saying goes, the best way to ride a horse is in the direction that the horse is going. Pacing and leading is based around Rapport which was developed from the french word, which refers to the special relationship a rider and its horse have. Robert Caldini (p71) states “Only by first aligning yourself with the direction of the horse is it possible to then slowly and deliberately steer it where you'd like to go. Simply trying to pull the horse in the desired direction immediately will just wear you out and probably just upset the horse in the process”. Young, full of energy, partying every night, I was 17. In a nightclub near where I had grown up. I had just read as far in the book on NLP persuasion called Tranceformations by Bandler & Grinder, up to where it suggests using connectives. To use pacing and leading to win people round to your beliefs.

The method it suggests is to use the word “As” that's all I needed to know. I marched down to the nightclub armed only with the phrase “As”. I told a girl that she would feel really excited, and then suggested that as she felt excited she would feel obsessed with me. Although I had a great deal of success with girls during those years, I barely felt a girl was obsessed with me enough that I would actually feel the same in return for them. I ended up been in a relationship with that girl for years.

Commonality: Situational Openers, Finding a shared moment. A common recommendation by seduction coaches, such as Ross Jeffries and by a well recognized hypnosis company called Head Hacking is the framework to use a compliment, introduction and then a question (CIQ) when approaching people. Its recommended usage, goes something like the following; “Hey that's a great jacket, I'm the performer here tonight, would you like to see some magic”. This technique can be noticed in the seduction community as situational openers. It’s important to maintain eye contact and deliver communication in the same tone and state that the message is intended, if you are describing something fun then it’s important to come across as if your fun. The concept of CIQ, is another technique that relies on pacing someones reality, (i.e. sharing commonality with them) before leading them. That way your suggestion is perceived as related to their sense of utility in the world, and they are likely to take the message on-board. Through implying that a your similar, to someone, even seemingly irrelevant matters such as “Its hot in here”, “I'm

drinking the same drink as you”, “I've got that watch” has a powerful effect, “The similarity of others to us plays an important role in determining how we see the correctness of an action; the social validation rule for compliance can be stated as follows; one should be more willing to comply with a request or behavior if it is consistent with what similar others are thinking or doing.” (Brock, Green: 2005, p150) Further evidence of this could be sort from a study by Garner, R. (2005) where a manager sent out requests to its work force, 75% of people who received the letter with a post-it-note attached performed the action required, whereas only 36% did when there was no hand-written message specifically requesting them. This shows that people recognize an extra-effort and a personal touch that directly recognizes them as a personal with unique needs. If we look at celebrities like Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake, Jonny Depp or Megan Fox we can see the effect that delivering a lifestyle that portrays character and attitude has to draw people in. Life can often be a popularity contest where instead of the quality or benefit that a particular individual really offers, if people want to be you, then they tend to copy you in order to achieve the benefits that your lifestyle seems to achieve. A great deal of persuasion research has shown that to be more persuasive we actually have to be more likeable, this might be a different experience from what many of us believe, as often persuasion can be confused with 'forcing', 'arguing' etc. If we think about the personalities descriptions of Cult-leaders Con-men, seducers, successful magicians, and successful salesmen; all have something in common!

All of their agents and audiences who fell into their beliefs, they actually liked them! All of these very different careerists are always described as 'Charismatic' and likable figures. This shows that villainous and successful men of society and share the common goal of becoming more likable. They are all successful at convincing others to do and believe what they suggest. By doing the things that cause people to like you, then you will find strangers will be more willing to listen to you and take onboard your ideas. Likeability is easily created if you present yourself as having; • Genuine interest in people • giving sincere compliments • matching body language + speech • appearing modest • being generous with time and skills • using eye contact By using these techniques you'll find people will feel loyalty towards the relationship. The key to winning other people over to our opinions often comes down to being hand in hand with how socially valuable your perceived and how much value you seem able to create for the audience your attempting to engage. Qualities that increase your likeability have been covered in the attraction section, for example; looking people in the eye, standing up straight, smiling, speaking in positive language, having an excited energy, and speaking about topics that are

original and not the average, finding the commonality between you and your audience and standing out often means breaking social boundaries and rules and coming across as a bit of a outlaw. It may be a difficult concept to talk about creating commonality and connecting with people when at the same time you are referring to building a framework where your almost a separate figure, someone with power, therefore part of motivating people to be interested in the things you say and then follow your suggestions and recommendations is to build a tribe of loyal participants who admire your leadership. Maintaining the power balance and asserting your authority and keeping your crowd always wanting more is key to maintaining the demand for your contributions and thus peoples desire to mimic you.

Creating Value This effect of people wanting something that's in demand, but noticeably in short supply is a good example of how one item is considered more valuable than another, we later discuss the origins of value and wealth as discussed by Philosopher & Economist Adam Smith however the concept of supply and demand is a central theme in what's becoming a common psychological approach to persuasion. Snowboarding, surfing, running are all fun sporting activities! We can go and take an afternoon to ourselves and enjoy these sports.. we might just be nicely playing about thinking we are doing really well! Until we notice someone else is doing tricks that we can't do?! Magicians, are constantly looking for the next best trick, to outsmart other magicians.... they don't want to be second best.

We could easily spend an afternoon running around a sports track, but if you think back to sports day at school, how fast you ran to try and beat your peers to get the prize. This shows us that, it is not just potential reward that motivates people to participate in a activity, but the rush to beat other players at receiving the reward! This competitive effect, could be described as “people are motivated more by losing out, than by gaining something” because losing out accounts for the additional social effect. Research by R. Cialdini (2007) supports this, when a sign indicated that the majority of people stole rare wood from a forest, the amount of thefts of rare wood increased by 7.92%. The sign read “Your heritage is being vandalised every day by theft losses of petrified wood of 14 tons a year, mostly a small piece at a time”. When it seems like everyone is doing an activity, suddenly everyone wants to do it. The sign that indicated lots of people stole wood, actually caused triple the number of people to steal wood compared to after the sign was removed. A case study by a graduate student retold this story, he said he had taken his girlfriend to the park who was the most honest woman he had ever met, the moment she read the sign she said “we best take some wood before there's none left” There are plenty of examples of this; Advertisers love to inform us that their product is the “fastest growing” or “Best Selling” because they do not have to convince us directly that their product is good; they only need to say that many others think so, which seems like sufficient proof Brock, Green: (2005,:150) From this it seems we take a great deal of cues from our environment, as what to what activities to participate in new

scenarios. These cues may be, a directed message towards us, social proof from the majority doing the activity, someone doing the activity on us and then us reciprocating, or someone reassuring us that it's the right thing to do because we like and trust them.

Chill out: intelligent leadership But how do we know the activities we pursue add value to our life? And what would happen if the activities we pursued weren't the best opportunity for us? Its believed by many researchers that, personality is a sense of wholeness. That is to say, we are a network of beliefs, memories, ideas etc that all are mutually supportive, from this our character (whole) is formed. It’s believed by research psychologists Silberman (2005) and Kehr (2003), that conflicting ambitions, activities, and ideas lead to personality conflicts, that cause psychological distress such as anxiety. “Discrepancies between the general beliefs and goals or strivings that compose the meaning systems of individuals… lead to rumination” The difficulty in life is, as its unpredictable, which activities we participate in will generate further sense of whole. And which projects will fail, crash and burn or conflict with our sense of self thus creating psychological worry. Winston Churchill famously said that “he had plenty of worries in his life, most of which never happened”, What could be noted is that individuals do seem to have a need to have a consistent reality, and that when life events occur that are somewhat unanticipated they seem to cause conflicts between personality parts

Its been shown that goal pursuits; and actually participating in action-orientated activities leads to increased psychological health; “The autonomous regulation of goal pursuits is associated with better performance and mental health...” therefore by referring to peoples sense of self pursuit and then using this as a pace we are likely to get them to follow our suggestions, also such individuals should feel an increased affiliation with you as you seem to offer them benefits and therefore they'll seek to reciprocate the favour. This desperate need to engage in projects/activities that seem to reinforce an individual’s sense of self concept, is something that can easily be used to benefit the persuaders ambitions, and through the agent engaging in the activities you set they can 'feel ' as if their life-needs are been met and they are avoiding personality inconsistency. Through intelligent leadership we offer people a sense of purpose, we get them involved into our tribes and along our paths and although they are taking on-board our beliefs they are learning about a way of life they sense might benefit them. offering people clarity in pursuit we temporarily allow them to, avoid “increased rumination about (their failure to achieve a clear pursuit)... and thus avoid psychological distress” associated with such projects (Sheldon, Elliot: 1999) People have a constant desire to remain consistent with their sense of consistency and purpose, by recognizing their unique identities and suggesting that the persuasive message we are illustrating benefits them to overcome their concerns then we can expect the percentage of individuals responding to our suggestions to increase significantly.

How to Hypnotize Ok, so hypnosis. At least the way I define it is about actually going after a hypnotic phenomenon and achieving it. What we explain throughout this book is that it’s really important to go for kinaesthetic phenomena as it provides a learning process where the subject can come to understand their own responsiveness as they work with a hypnotist. Therefore we are going to teach you the ways to use the following routines before we go into more detail about how hypnosis works, and the important structure that you should consider when building your routines. I’ve never really read many other hypnosis books, the truth is there isn’t’ really many books on hypnosis for this kind of thing. Street Hypnosis is really just a new buzzword that is in the public domain with thousands of hypnotists around the world describing themselves as that and seeming to learn hypnosis from watching one another’s YouTube videos or attending a training course such as the course we run at www.streethypnotism.com Steeple fingers Magnetic hands Hand clasp Press hands Eye lock Stiff arm Hand stuck to table

Making a subject unable to speak Feet stuck to the floor Stuck to your chair Hand stuck to the head Handshakes Arm levitation And more. So we are going to dedicate time to those procedures. We will also explain in detail the way in which you should approach a group of people when you are going to perform hypnosis on them. I need to point out that you don’t necessary need to announce yourself as a hypnotist in order to have hypnotic phenomena occur in your participants. As we have already covered nothing you’re doing is really not explained in terms of cognitive neuroscience, so really just just standard psychology persuasion techniques just used in a particular way to which hypnotists seem to understand. The hypnosis we are going to specialize in for the purpose of this text book is the hypnosis that I’ve been working on developing for nearly the last ten years and that’s something we call ‘Street Hypnosis’. One of the most complex things about getting your hypnosis right is really about introduce yourself in a likeable manner and delivering a compelling pre talk.

The pre talk is a conversation about hypnosis that should aim to alleviate the misconceptions from the participants. Many misconceptions that a subject has about hypnosis can really interfere with the way they listen and engage with the hypnotist and therefore it’s important you need to have your subject concentrate so you can show them something interesting. Sometimes by actually avoiding calling yourself a hypnotist you can avoid the hassle of having to deal with all the misconceptions of the hypnotic subject in response to you. I know you need an approach, you’re thinking “what am I going to say when I go over to a group to hypnotize them” So I’m going to give you the words that you should use. There’s various lines you can say to people when you begin to offer that you’re going to do something “ I want to show you something using your mind?”, “Can I show you something interesting?”, “I want to show you something about psychology..” any of these approaches are good. It’s also a good idea to present hypnosis as part of a magic trick but to do the hypnosis without mentioning that it is explicitly hypnosis. So the first routine you’re going to perform is. Ok I know what you’re thinking “where do I begin?” you want to learn the real hypnosis right? Well, I always pretty much nearly always start with kinaesthetic phenomena… either I make a subject have their hand stuck to something such as a table, or their hands stuck together so they are clasped (interlocked fingers) or pressed together, or I have the subject have their hand stuck to my hand from a handshake.

These make up 95% of my opening routines, maybe even a higher percentage. The only exception to this is when I skip these routines and go straight for the end result – the hypnotic phenomena I want the subject to finally experience. That’s right you heard me correct – you don’t actually need to perform these kinaesthetic phenomena in order to get the final result you seek. Now you’re probably thinking, “Then why on earth are you teaching me kinaesthetic phenomena”. I can list some good reasons. Making a hypnosis subject stuck to the floor, or stuck to you, or stuck to a chair or whatever… makes them have to listen to you, because you’ve put them in the predicament of being stuck in that position and not been able to work out how to get out of it. I can give you another good example why kinaesthetic phenomena are actually amazing. It’s fantastic because the hypnosis subject can actually see the phenomena happening. They can see and feel their hand been stuck to someone and then they can play with that reality, they can pull on that hand, they can complain how they are stuck to something etc. By having the subject ‘see’ or ‘watch’ the phenomena of becoming stuck to something happen then you’ve actually really taught the subject how they can actually be out of control, how you’re able to somehow influence their mind. By having a subject focus on the fact that you can influence their mind, kind of hypnotizes them so they believe that you can only do that, and that they can’t do anything else other than listen to you.

This is actually the formula for having a great hypnotic subject out of almost about anyone you meet. Where did I learn about the power of kinaesthetic phenomena? Well other than the Derren Brown radio 1 interview that I’ve already cited one of the first books I ever bought about performance hypnosis was “The New Encyclopaedia of Stage Hypnotism” by Ormond McGill. (1996) Actually the first time I ever performed hypnosis I told my subject that they would experience pins and needles in their arms and those pins and needles would move up as their body goes stiff, and when that stiff feeling reached their head they would fall asleep. This was one of the weirdest most complex inductions I’ve ever done and it’s strange to think it was the first time I attempted hypnosis. I don’t know where I got the idea that I could do that from because at the time the only thing I had ever read was Tranceformations by Bandler and Grinder which really was an incredible book and I could do with reading it again. Later on when I began writing a PDF with my friends on how to hypnotize in 2004, I started collecting routines that I heard about, and adding my own features into them, I remember much of my thinking was influenced by the book by Ormond McGill (1996) It’s a book full of routines and phenomena’s many of which my routines have been inspired from there, but from other sources to. Steeple fingers, magnetic hands, and hand clasp are all routines which I learnt from the Encyclopaedia of stage hypnotism.

I once saw a hypnotist called Freddy Jacquin perform a steeple fingers into a hand clasp. I don’t know what his exact wording was, although when I read through the encyclopaedia of stage hypnotism again it kind of sounded like the steeple fingers and the handclasp were supposed to be performed together, or could be performed side by side one another. Later when I read through The Encyclopaedia of Stage Hypnotism (1996, p73) by Ormond McGill again I got excited and started using the steeple fingers to hand clasp.

It’s a binary or die situation I’ve mentioned before and I’ll say it again, I really didn’t like hypnosis when I started it. Sure I thought the dream of being a hypnotist sounded amazing, but the reality of the long boring stage hypnosis inductions and even the phenomena such as arm levitation or making a hypnosis subject laugh just seemed a bit lame. To me it always seemed obvious that a hypnotist’s job should be to make people do stuff against their own will, that it should be that the hypnotist is a kind of super hero who can make anyone do anything and this provided a clear direction for my experiments. When I first went to hypnotize someone over text I didn’t know that people would tell me that it was impossible, all that I knew was that I couldn’t just do a routine where I made the hypnotic subject on the other side of the internet’s arm rise up (arm levitation) because this wouldn’t really prove that the subject was hypnotized as I wouldn’t be sure if the subject just lifted up their arm themselves because they weren’t sure if I was asking them to lift it, or if it was moving up automatically.

I don’t think having their arm rise up would have felt like they had no control over their arm, and therefore I thought the subject would always interpret their position as “not being hypnotized” which seemed to me that it would be useless then if I was going to make the subject do something against their consent, because their arm rising up by itself felt consensual. So when I went on the internet and stepped into a chat to hypnotize someone for the first time, the words that came out of my typing fingers were Derren Brown’s radio 1 hand stuck to the table into name amnesia suggestions. In a book which you can find on my website I analyse many of the old transcripts of conversations that I had when I first began doing chat hypnosis in my early days. On the website I compare the responsiveness from the language I was using back then to screencast conversation recordings so you can see in real time what I typed of hypnosis text sessions that I have performed recently with the updated language that you can find in this hypnosis book. My goal for you reading this book is the same as the goal I constantly have for myself. I want you to be able to get a strong binary phenomena within maximum of two minutes of interacting with a subject, I know there might seem like there is a lot of detail in this book, but honestly you will quickly find that really I’m only listing a small series of simple steps and a few words and paragraphs to say in between those simple steps. Hypnosis doesn’t have to be complicated I’m just trying to make sure you understand everything that can go wrong so you know how to do it right in the most difficult circumstances and believe

me hypnotizing in the streets across cultures around the world is a difficult environment. You might think that this book is full of a lot of information and routines but I can get through all the information listed in this book when interacting with a hypnosis subject probably in less than 4 minutes. I make up these silly games that I play with myself when I hypnotize people, but honestly don’t copy me and do these games you already have enough pressure on yourself. Sometimes I press the timer button on my IPhone before I approach a group and I have it count down from 30 seconds – and I expect it to go off after I’ve got name amnesia. This might sound hard, but honestly I think name amnesia is actually quite an easy routine to achieve in that kind of length of time. I think now is a good opportunity to mention safety advice; one of the reasons we don’t do sleep inductions in street hypnosis despite all the hypnosis trainers out there trying to cash in on the term and make people go out there and do their stage hypnosis inductions on the street. Is because if a bouncer (security guard) or police woman see’s that you’ve laid a subject out on the street they are going to be extremely worried about the safety of their customers. If you lay someone’s friend out on the floor, their friends are going to be extremely worried as to why you’re going this, and whether their friend is ok. The natural reaction to you laying someone on the ground is that someone is going to shout at you. Just don’t get subjects to close their eyes in general. Other advice I have is that don’t get carried

away…. You see, in this first week I’m having you make a hypnotic subject have their hands stuck Together. I don’t mind you leaping ahead and doing name amnesia or some other routine. The problem is, just don’t do anything stupid… if you tell a hypnotic subject they are on fire don’t be surprised if they strip off all their clothes, don’t be surprised if they run and get the fire extinguisher and set it off, don’t be surprised if they run out into the road.. And get hit by a car. If you do a silly routine like that and don’t handle it correctly you are going to get someone killed. Sorry to be a scare monger. There’s a lot of stuff about the legality of street hypnotists on the internet, particularly information about myself and a handful of others. Hypnosis isn’t illegal in most countries… the rumours you hear about it being illegal is mostly nonsense, really you should ask a lawyer and not me for legal advice. If you’re not looking at information on a government website then don’t trust the information. Largely the rule is, if you’re in some states in Africa, or some states in the Middle East, and you’re doing street hypnosis… then you do stand a chance of going prison. If you’re in the rest of the world such as England, United States, Europe; I believe that although people might advise you against street hypnosis… I believe it’s against your human rights not to be able to express yourself in this manner. However you need to remember that when you’re in a bar or a nightclub you are on someone else’s property and you need to abide by their rules else you are in fact trespassing. So the number #1 rule is to be professional, be well spoken, be kind, be

nice, and sometimes smile. You don’t own people, and they don’t own you. Please just keep your relationships at arm’s length, its ok to talk to strangers but don’t suddenly expect to become their best mate immediately out of it. People can be a bit clingy, and honestly if someone comes up to me and tries to be my mate… my number one reaction is to try and get rid of them….As much as I spend my life with people, I really need my own space, and we all do. So keep your professionalism, and niceness at the forefront of your mind because they are going to be your savours when people start to overreact about your being in their venue. With regards to those who are scared to approach strangers…. Just fully imagine the worst case scenario… suppose you got punched in the back of the head, or suppose the bouncers got you permanently banned from all the bars in the city. Those things could happen… but I want you to realize that they won’t happen, so stop worrying about a girl rejecting you, that’s really the least of your worries. Sometimes I get emails like “Vince how are you so brave, you must have balls of steel?” I kid you not I’m the most scared little man in the history of mankind… I’m afraid of everything… But I’m also aware that I am going to die and I’ve got to do something about it, I’ve got to live. So let’s briefly look at the language that Ormond McGill (1996) uses to make one arm of a hypnosis subject go up and the other goes down. "Now as you stand with your arms outstretched and your eyes closed, imagine there is a heavy weight attached to your right wrist, and that weight is so heavy it commences to pull your

right hand down, down towards the floor. The weight is so heavy, down, down it pulls your arm. Let your right arm move downward with the heaviness you experience as you concentrate upon it. "Now think of your left arm, and imagine there is a balloon filled with helium gas fastened to your left wrist, and as the balloon rises into the air your left arm follows it and moves up, up, up. Your left arm is so light it rises up, up, up into the air." You probably played games like this in school where you made people’s arms move up, or you made someone feel really light just by talking to them. I know I played these games but I knew a few people at the time who were into spiritualism and I guess that was the reason we were playing the games… Which was silly really but kids just pick up things they are bored all day and they just look for anything to do that seems mildly interesting to occupy their restless brains. So the first routine that I’m going to have you learn is really the one which you’re going to be performing the most if your anything like me. That routine is ‘Steeple Fingers’ also known as ‘Extended Fingers’, Crankily Fingers & Magnetic fingers. There is a great book that, Anthony Jacquin wrote called “Reality is Plastic” (2008) where he details a few hypnosis routines; all of which are well explained,

Ideomotor responses What you are looking for when you begin hypnotizing someone is for them to respond to your commands immediately and literally, if I tell someone that their hands might begin to shake

then I expect to see their hands move slightly all by themselves, if I tell someone there is magnets on their fingertips I expect to see their fingers move in a way that resembles magnets pulling those fingers together, I expect to see responses even though they are responding to the physical sensation of those fingers coming together because of the muscle tension. It’s usually a sign of a good hypnotic subject is they instantly get these kind of automatic muscular movements or shakes the moment you start speaking to them, a fascinated, compliant or somnambulist type subject will likely copy you, suck up to you, be really nice to you, be a bit too keen to work with you and lots of other things.. That way you know the subject is really attentive, but don’t worry if the person you’re speaking to hasn’t shown any of those signs yet all that means is that you need to be more enthusiastic and encourage their attention and emotions better. Even when a subject is playing along, acting, confused or just listening to me, or even in the pre talk these are vital opportunities to understand whether the subject is picking up on your suggestions or not. A huge portion of the time hypnotic subjects might have misinterpreted a phenomena you’ve suggested to them or whatever reason they just aren’t feeling it or responding to it, and it’s too easy to disregard them as not hypnotized or difficult to hypnotize because they will tell you that they are not hypnotizable, but simultaneously you should be looking to see if they are responding to at least some of the things you’re saying. A classic example of this is when you make a subject feel good you might say “you feel really relaxed and great” and then a few moments later you might notice that the subject seems to be

laughing, now to a new hypnotist it could be easy to make the assumption that the reason for their laughing is that they are not hypnotized. One of the early moments in becoming a new hypnotist is really realizing that subjects are always awake, they always have the ability to communicate, and if they want that can kick, scream and complain how they can’t be hypnotized how they aren’t really feeling it and you can walk them through every hypnotic routine on the list while they say it. In Steeple Fingers when I’m asking someone to press their palms together at the beginning of setting up the routine I’m saying that and I’m expecting the subject to have just heard those few words and as a result sincerely press their palms together, if they casually in their own time decide to take their two hands and put them out in a manner which seems like they are just “putting out their two hands” but without following the further details of your instructions, then you need to wonder why the subject is not listening to you, or directly going against the very words you are saying. Don’t work with a subject who isn’t following your suggestions, either repeat your instructions again and have them do it properly or ditch the hypnosis subject for been unable to follow basic instructions. You don’t want to work with people who are incapable of listening to you.

Arm Levitation Let’s begin by having you practice arm levitation:

Now, arm levitation is pretty much a simple routine, all you want someone to do is to rest their arm, or to have one arm left out from your previous routine i.e. one of the two arms left from after the magnetic hands. Things you say is “I want you to imagine your arm is tied to helium balloons and it’s going to [said with a little bit of emphasis] move up into the sky all by itself as it raises up [bit of emphasis] all the way now [2] all by itself [3] as if it’s got a mind of its own, it just goes [higher and higher] and [lighter and lighter] as if that arm just feels like and raises up.” Now you might notice their arm might move up quickly or slowly, even with a very good hypnotic subject what might be happening is that they are merely experiencing the very fact that helium balloons are rather weak – that might be the impression of some people, I suspect for example that to lift your arm from helium balloons you would need maybe 70 helium balloons. Therefore the persons arm might just feel exactly how you’ve suggested it to feel “as if a helium balloon has lifted it” so it’s useful to move away from the emphasis the metaphor that the helium balloon has provided and instead focusing on the fact that “the arm is lifting all by itself, as quick as it wants” but without sounding as if your saying “It’s going too slow please can you make it quicker” it’s my experience trying lots of different ways of hypnotizing that the moment you sound like your begging the subject to be hypnotized – they experience conscious decision over their actions and they suddenly will not experience the phenomena you specify – which is my exact criticism of using NLP style representation systems or another variation of hypnotizing someone to hypnotize, because I believe your offering the subject too much choice about how they get hypnotized, It’s also why I dislike the phrase “all hypnosis is

self-hypnosis” because then hypnotic subjects struggle to see how the phenomena they are experiencing is separated from their own sense of conscious action. When you’re doing arm levitation because of the length of time it often takes it gives you a good opportunity to tell the subject the right things to be experiencing, and how to treat hypnosis – therefore assuming they are being deepened, or assuming that the subject will now assume that all suggestions you deliver will be carried out automatically as if a part of themselves if listening and organising those behaviours on cue – so quickly they feel out of control. Now you might notice that the subjects arm begins to rise fairly slowly, once again it’s important to always give the impression that it is happening.. That you’re suggesting it to happen by hypnosis and that it is just going to rise up by itself. You might have a good hypnotic subject but still experience that their arm seems to raise only slowly up; now you can never be sure why that is, it might be because the subject isn’t really feeling it, but more often than not it’s because your suggestions that your saying is encouraging a slow arm lift. If you imagine that your arm is being pulled by helium balloons that drags it up into the air then you probably imagine something very slow – it doesn’t encourage the impression of a something powerful that makes the arm raise. So you should be happy even if the arm seems to be moving only very slowly, you always have the opportunity to say “that’s right the arm is moving by itself” once you see that the arm is indeed significantly moving. Here is a selection of words you could say when you’re making someone’s arm rise up.

“That arm is tied to helium balloons, it’s getting lighter and lighter as if it’s pulled up by a wire it’s going to float up into the sky all by itself now, as it moves up all by itself.” Now sometimes when you’re hypnotizing someone you need to find opportunities to say something else other than how the arm is going to move by itself, else you can start to sound rather repetitive. Times like this are a good opportunity for deepening which will shall cover in one of the sections below.

Make their eyes stuck together So here is a routine that made a girl I once did it on also cry. Some young girls really get scared by not been in control, god that’s a judgemental thing to say. Ok I don’t mean to say that. What I mean to say is that if you go up to someone and you make it so they can’t open their eyes anymore they tend to get a little bit scared. Because they feel completely out of control, this might be bad in the perspective of the hypnotic subject but it’s really quite essential for us as hypnotists to make our subjects feel like they are substantially under our influence and the reasons for why this is important is something that we will discuss in greater detail further on in this book. This is the script I use to make someone’s eyes stuck closed, the language about making the subject look towards the ceiling was something I heard on an MP3 recording by a hypnotist called David Caloff in about 2005.

[script] “[1]]imagine there is a window in the top of your head and [2] I want you to look up with your eyes closed and [3] focus on seeing if you can see through the spot and [4] imagine you’re seeing the ceiling (or sky) above you and as you keep doing that you realize that [4] your eye lids feel heavy, so heavy they [5] feel almost stuck, so stuck in fact as you look up through that window your eyes are stuck, and you can’t remember how to open them.[6]and this slightly makes you panic, but” to quickly analyse the suggestions. The structure I’ve just used here [1] is to set the context of the experiment and in a way is a guise or distraction to have it make logical sense that you have their eyes roll up to look through that window – it should be noted it’s difficult to open your eyelids when your eyes are rolled back because of the shape of the eyeballs. [2] Is a clear instruction to have them look up whether they have done so already or not [3] this is a suggestion to concentrate and focus assuming they are not doing so already, just saying that to have them continue looking at that spot. [4] it’s a fact their eyelids will feel kind of heavy, I’m almost asking them to check if they are heavy, or to realize the feeling inside of themselves that their eyes feel heavy, I repeat the heavy sentiment again as a suggestion for heaviness beyond the original implication – I progressed or stretched the feeling further than its original outline. [5] I’ve paced the feeling of heaviness to stuck-ness, I’ve compared the two, or said the two are equal that heaviness’s = stuck-ness which isn’t necessarily true but now it sounds true, once again I make that statement go further with “SO STUCK that,” and then [6] I confirm this feeling with a bit of panic, I’m telling them the emotion to feel before they check whether they are stuck, and as they find that fearful emotion they’ll also check their eyes are stuck under the

frame of that emotion – which implies the result that their eyes are stuck and they are genuinely concerned. In the routine for the ‘Eye lock’ the logic was good and sensible and it produced the final result of the person feeling their eyes are stuck, now usually when I began out in hypnosis I would follow their eyes been stuck with “the reason your eyes are stuck is because when I say the word sleep, you go deep asleep, your body just relaxes and you feel like your deeply asleep, as I say [emphasis] SLEEP, now”, and then I would go into deepening (suggestions that imply the person is becoming more and more hypnotized) “as you go deepener now and follow exactly what I say, it’s like your body and mind carry out all the behaviours I specify as if they happen all by themselves.” Therefore the following statements in the pattern-handshake induction should try and achieve something like the level of precision that the eye-lock to sleeping statements and deepening statements delivers.

Hand Stuck to the table. Hand stuck to the table is really one of my favourite hypnosis routines; something about it just seems so simple and beautiful. I’ve done magic tricks where I’ve made someone’s hand stuck to the table as part of the trick and the person has been absolutely convinced that I must have put something on the table that has suddenly made their hand stuck to it. I’ve even been on a date with a girl who doesn’t know I’m a hypnotist and while at the date I’ve had her place her hand on the table and then its subsequently been stuck and she’s been really concerned and worried as to why her hand is stuck.

You can perform hypnosis just as easily whether you mention you’re a hypnotist or not, the key is you just have to ask your participant to concentrate and listen for a moment and follow your instructions. You could frame this as a psychological experiment or you could just have them begin following your instructions for no reason in particular, providing they do it then it doesn’t matter why they press their hand on the table just as long as they do. So I used to make all the mistakes about having someone “imagine there is superglue on your hand, and it’s heating up and that hand is sticking to the table as if it’s becoming tightly stuck and in a moment you will try and lift that but realize your unable it just presses down and is completely stuck.” However I don’t use any language like that before, nor the structure of it. I spend a long time making sure a hypnosis subject really consciously follows what I need them to follow when I stick their hand to the table. And then I have their hand press down, and then I will start to have them begin practicing trying to move their hand, then I will have them suddenly realize their hand is stuck and offer them the chance to lift it. Let’s look at some of the language that Ormond McGill (1995) in the Encyclopaedia of Stage hypnotism recommends us to use He states to use the suggestions “You are very relaxed and comfortable, with a feeling of heaviness throughout your body. I would like you now to think about your left arm and hand. Pay close attention to them. They feel numb and heavy, very heavy.... How heavy your left hand feels.... Even as you think

about how heavy it is, it grows heavier and heavier.... Your left arm is getting heavier.... Heavy.... Heavy.... Your hand is getting heavier, very heavy, as though it were being pressed against its resting place. You might like to find out a little later how heavy your hand is.... It seems much too heavy to move.... But in spite of being so heavy, maybe you can move it a little, but maybe it is too heavy even for that.... Why don't you see how heavy it is.... Just try to lift your hand up.... Just try....”(p30) So when I just meet a hypnotic subject and I’m going to perform the hand stuck to the table on them I typically place my hand on the table and I begin pressing my hand down onto the table and I tell the subject “just press your hand into the table” I’m hoping that because I’ve demonstrated what I expect the subject do by pressing my own hand into the table and acting as if it’s kind of tense then it will cause them to press in a similar manner. One of the most important things is the way they press their hand down. I tell them to press their hand down. The way I have them press is like I’ll have them press their hand down and their elbow up, putting their arm almost directly straight down onto the table. Thereby making it difficult for them to directly lift the hand up if they tried because all their body weight would be pressing that hand down. The other way that I can set them up for the way they need to press their hand down is to have their hand flat on the table and have them pull their hand back so their forearm is out stretched, but their elbow goes back 4 inches behind their back. If that makes any sense, I have to admit it is difficult to explain what you need to do over text… I’m here writing this down and I’m

doing all the hand movements and trying to explain what you need to do, but this one with the forearm the general rule is just to have the subject pull their forearm and elbow as far back as it will go, then this means they haven’t got any more muscular room to pull back their arm any further without either them moving their body position or their shoulder coming out of their socket. A person is by definition hypnotized when “you deliver a suggestion for a result, but simultaneously deliver a suggestion for the opposite” and they respond to both. For example I could make someone's hand heavy and it would feel heavy, and the subject may not realize that their hand is so heavy that its “kind of stuck to the table” but because they never check whether it’s so heavy they can’t lift it, then you could never by definition say their hand is stuck and thereby claim that they are experiencing a hypnotic phenomena and thus hypnotized. Whereas if I deliver the suggestions [for example in the following script for hand stick] “focus on that hand pressing into the table, as you press that hand into the table you realize it starts feeling tense and almost pressing itself so much, as if that’s all it can do and keeps on pressing, keeps on pressing and you have no idea but you can’t; even move it slightly it’s just stuck there all by itself, that’s all it can do and You can’t work it out” the first half of my suggestion for hand stuck to the table in Thus particular wording, never made it clear that the end result would be that the subject will be unable to move their hand from the table, I didn’t let the subject know that would happen until I

was sufficiently happy that the muscular response in the hand would regularly rehearse pressing to the table as the easiest muscular expression. Then when I feel that priming has been achieved I switch all my suggestions onto what will happen if they were try to test whether that hand was stuck – thereby revealing my intentions “to make their hand stuck to the table” and thus immediately opening the line of opportunity for the subject to potentially “resist” or “check” that their hand is stuck but I want to take that response into account in my suggestions and give them clear instructions for what to experience whenever they check. By having the subject experience the ‘stuckness’ or the lack of control over their own mind then I have almost suggested someone into experiencing dissociation from themselves – I’ve hypnotized someone to recognize their own normal state of being out of control, and thereby the subject may assume this is always the case for the rest of the suggestions I deliver following this. What we had to do in this section is just briefly cover hypnosis, because we cognize that many of the people reading this book might be hypnotists already many also might have wanted to read this book for all kinds of reasons, and in order for them to understand all the concepts talked about in this book. You should really just try to find a subject (a person) and just ask them to close their eyes and seat still for a moment, and just try to make their arm levitate by talking in language that assumes the arm is going to go up. It’s not as hard as you might think if you’ve never done it, it’s not impossible or difficult and it’s not different to being able to do the ‘real hypnosis’ like making someone forget their name, its very similar… trust me if you can

make someone’s arm raise up, you can make someone forget their name it’s just a strategy. This text could be viewed as an explanation into how to make your hypnosis much more advanced if you’re a hypnotist already, or how to improve any of your social talents that you’ve currently got… by analysing the information covered crossresearch between all these topic areas we discover general trends and similarities, this allows us to build an entirely new approach, one that doesn’t belong to any particular field, but looks more like an economic or philosophic overarching theory. In the next chapter we are going to begin to delve further into the economics behind the approach, and then we will discover all the ways in which it applies in a variety of fields.

Economics Many may think? What use does economics have for solving the problem of human rationality? But Nobel Prize Winner Herbert Simon, states “Psychological theories of ‘intuitive thinking cannot match the elegance and precision of formal normative models of belief and choice… rational models of psychology are unrealistic” (American Economic Review, Vol 93, No. 5 (Dec, 2003). that is to say, he has shown economics to be a more predictive a model of forecasting human behaviour than other social sciences. When we think of economics, we probably imagine financial charts showing the rising price of the Chinese Yen compared against the US dollar. Surprisingly economics is a social science; because it studies how people interact with each other. It studies how people interact in order to predict what people are likely to do under different environments.

Economics is split into two fields, Macro -Economics that studies big social trends like, why people get married, how many children are people likely to have, what religion is likely to become popular or decline, why certain government’s might be elected or how many people will break the law next year. And the study of microeconomics, which is essential to the functioning of the broader macro-economic system. At the core of any economic theory, there must be a theory of human behavior, as Economies are ultimately made up of people. A theory of economic behaviour must answer questions such as, how do we make economic decisions? What kinds of information do we use? And, are there some types of decisions that we are better or worse at making?” Eric Beinhocker (2007:117) Micro- Economics is the study of the decisions between relatively few players, which job opportunity are you likely to take? Should a coca cola increase its prices etc. Divorce, parenthood, revolutions education, crime and dancing in the streets are all instances of people making choices and paying prices for things they value social scientists want to establish why we want certain things and avoid others. As we want to know how people can negotiate each other, how one individual can gain power over another, then the discussion throughout the rest of this section will merely focus on microeconomics. Imagine a train pulls up, and you’re presented with 20 doors to board the train through, what causes you to walk to the door that you do? If you didn’t think about which door you chose then what force caused you to enter that door? According to

economics, you will take the shortest route towards the nearest door, because we do what's the least effort but offers the greatest reward. Microeconomics is the study of which decision your likely to take, under various constraints, that Individuals try to achieve their objectives given their limitations – Limited time, money, and energy – that is to say they optimize. Tommasi,M. Ierulli, K. Becker, G. (1995:1) Obviously businesses and governments see it as important as fine tuning this will increase the bank balances of those who use such analysis. But when applied to the decisions of consumers, or social groups it can be rather telling about what drives human decision making. To understand humans existence and therefore choice we should take a look at the various discussions into what is a sensible decision, and what is not. For this we can look to the study of ethics or moral philosophy. Its concerned with what decisions makes us good people and which decisions makes us bad, for example; what makes certain individuals commit crimes, what should be a crime and what shouldn’t, what’s a moral activity and what’s not? These are common questions that stand as the fundamentals of understanding human motivation. For example, is it OK to steal someone else’s possessions if you needed them more than the owner? What exactly do we believe human nature to be? Do humans aim to hurt and kill each other like they do during wars, or are people naturally good? By solving exactly the motivation behind most human decisions, will lead us to understand how people make decisions.

You've probably heard of Adam Smith, or know twenty of them, other than being a common British name; it’s the name of the man, whose diagram appears on the back of a British twenty pound note, What made him have the level of status the queen gets on the British currency? He is widely considered the founder of understanding what motivates humans to work together, or work apart. Smith was a professor at University of Glasgow and began investigating what defines one activity as moral and another not? And therefore what drives us to commit moral activities over immoral ones. He left the Scottish university to teach the children of royalty across the world about philosophy, however he would often find himself bored and un-stimulated by the teaching despite the higher pay. It was during this time that he found an answer for why humans work together and why they go to war. Adam Smith initially struggled to understand how humans can work together at all, he writes “How can a man who is interested chiefly in himself make moral judgments that satisfy other people? After all, each person stands at the center of his own system, just as the sun stands at the center of the planets. Does the sun care what the smaller plants think?”(p15, New ideas from dead economists) Another big contributor to the development of economics was John Stuart Mill. He was born to a family of philosophers in the 1770's. Mill's family were made rich from pursuits organized by Jeremy Bentham, he built prisons across the UK, and had to devise ways

to keep the prisoners happy. This led his family to be particularly interested in how best to ensure human happiness, both for the individual and then for the prisoners as a society. His father and Jeremy Bentham devised that humans must do what makes them happy! To do what made them most happy would be the most moral activity they could do. Therefore, they believed a moral decision would be, if something feels good we should do it. They called their moral philosophy Utilitarianism. However, young budding UK Parliament-man John Stuart Mill noticed flaw in this, what if an activity that makes one person happy, makes everyone else unhappy. For example we could consider a case of paedophiles taking great pleasure in an activity, whereas the rest of society becomes upset about its occurrence. He believed a much more sensible action would be one, where the greatest number of people is made happy, minus the unhappy people, over the lost potential other activities that could have been selected instead. To select the potential activity that has the highest happiness score. This became known as Rule Utilitarianism “The Maximum amount of happiness for the maximum number of people, after all unhappiness deducted”. This fitted with Adam Smith’s former work on humans being motivated by higher utility. Smith's book title was 'On the origins of value and the wealth of nations' because he showed that people are driven by value (minus losses through time & effort etc.) , and he defined value to be down to a concept he dubbed, supply and demand.

He showed, that the final price of an good, depends on the level of competition for the production of that good. How many sellers are offering. How similar their offerings are. If the level of competitiveness is high, then the price offered by producers will eventually equal the cost in obtaining that material. An example of a highly precious stone like Diamonds, represents value, its value is defined in the difficulty of acquiring the stone, the rareness of such stones etc. but yet the clear recognizably of a diamond when you see one. This means that it is by definition valuable. You may recognize the concept of supply and demand as we have already covered in the persuasion section, when something is known and useful to all, but yet difficult to acquire. It is deemed valuable and therefore motivates people, as both Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill had defined human motivations to be those that benefited the self. This idea that the activity that benefits us most after the loss of things such as time and effort became known as self-interest or expected utility and became central to understanding human decision making. It was noted, that this makes human motivation appear ultimately selfish, whereas we are all familiar with human emotions being rather complex, rather than just selfish, there is a whole range of expression such as sadness, joy, anger, kindness etc. The motivations of human beings have always been put down to rather selfish concerns by a plethora of social theorists, for example Freud (1856-1939) proposed humans were motivated by “self-preservation instincts” however when criticized as being

'vague' he went on to suggest 'food and sex' as primary motivations' another founder of psychology William James (1842-1910) proposed “the faculty of acting in such a way to produce certain ends, without foresight of the end, or without previous education in the performance”. Many thinkers have criticized psychology and economics for having such a bleak view as to portray humans as selfish, this criticism caused Smith to issue a response; Which shows humans to be inadvertently altruistic, he questions; If we are all so selfish, then why are we not constantly at war stealing and fighting in the streets with each other for bigger houses, faster cars? Smith answers “If we all seek to promote our own selfinterest, we benefit society. He neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it... he intends only his own gain and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention” Adam Smith (1776:26) One of his most famous quotations that people remember when they think of Adam Smith “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest” Adam Smith (1776) This is why economists are not denying the range of human emotion, but instead claiming it’s the environment that creates the range of human emotional experience. As humans we look out of the window in the morning and think… “What can I do that doesn’t cost me much than can make me a profit?”

You then do these work activities that benefit society, and they society pays you a reward, this is what the term free market refers to, your ability to participate in however you choose to sell and buy, at whatever price, whatever you want. For Example; “Suppose a man called John, one morning admiring his wood sculpture of a polar bear he once made... he has an idea, why don't I make more wooden polar bears and sell them. He thought the wood from Argentina only cost $66 and he can probably sculpt one polar bear in 4 days, he decides to sell each one for $197 bringing him a large profit. He makes 10 sculptures and rents a shop to display his work to his neighbours, everyone thinks the sculptures are hideous.. no one buys one”. In this scenario, John did what he believed would be fun, and what he wanted rather than what the people wanted and the invisible hand considered the wood & his labour to be a waste of valuable resources that could have been used better elsewhere in society, thus he lost money. The worth of a product to society, depends on how much it further drives their productivity (i.e. their utility) if an item means that individuals will be able to achieve more self interest with lesser time, effort and resources then it will be considered greater value to each individual. Adam Smith says that this is “The real price of everything” The way he calculates this is “What every thing really costs to the man who wants to acquire it, is the toil and trouble of acquiring it. What every thing is really worth to the man who has acquired it, and who wants to dispose of it, or exchange it for something else, …..That this is really the foundation of the exchangeable value of all things.”

He explained that human “self interest drives markets to form a balance, a stable state where prices are agreed on, traders are made, and the market clears.... That this balanced state could be regarded as an equilibrium point that could be mathematically calculated.... It was shown that if people attempt to maximize their happiness in a world of individually differing utilities and finite resources, they would inevitably trade their way to the market equilibrium point” Eric Beinhocker (2007:35) That is to say, any good or service has a mathematically predictable one price. This is often known as the law of one price. Webfinance (2012) It’s not the amount of effort we put into creating something that defines its value, but how much it is valued by others amongst competition from other producers of that knowledge, information, attitude or product. Markets self-regulate through competition to naturally select the most beneficial option. The diamond market is an example of one where its close to monopolistic. Whereas in an example of a highly competitive market, could be for example; the difficulty for people in highly populated rural areas of Asia and Africa, who earn little more for their labour than the cost of food in order to continue their labour. Because the difficulty for people to offer a different offering, their time and effort is competed against the effort of their peers, until their competition between each other pushes down their revenue until their efforts become unprofitable. This is the concept of a perfectly competitive market, “they exist when every participant is a "price taker", and no participant influences the price of the product it buys or sells.” - Wikipedia reference,

You may have played a game as a child called Monopoly in this game you can own sections of the board that players travel around and whoever lands on your ownership has to pay you rent, as the game progresses and you take over more sections of the board you can raise your prices, and charge people more often. Whereas, if you look at the example of individuals who are super rich, for example Bill Gates, the former owner of Microsoft, he resigned from Microsoft after it was discovered that his company was making their software incompatible with other computers and software providers, therefore locking in audiences who have to continue upgrading their software and paying Microsoft whatever fee they set, this is referred to as a monopoly. The concept of perfect competition and monopoly are polar opposites, yet different degrees of each can be noticed in every business and social context. “The price of monopoly is upon every occasion the highest which can be got. The natural price, or the price of free competition, on the contrary, is the lowest which can be taken, not upon every occasion, indeed, but for any considerable time together. The one is upon every occasion the highest which can be squeezed out of the buyers, or which, it is supposed, they will consent to give: the other is the lowest which the sellers can commonly afford to take, and at the same time continue their business." Adam Smith (1976) Microsoft got fined Billions of dollars! Because a complete monopoly on a large scale is illegal in most economic areas... but in the case of smaller monopolies they are supported by governments in the forms of patents, intellectual property and

sole distribution rights. The government gives you these grants so no one else can copy your ideas and sell them, allowing you to make as much profit off them as you would like. i.e. they kindly prevent you being attacked by competition so you can build a business. How competitive a situation is, i.e. how monopolistic versus perfectly competitive it is, is highly studied by economists and strategists. Michael Porter, is particularly famous for his analysis into how companies can make their product offering be as valuable as possible amongst competition. Michael Porter, A Havard Business School Professor is world renowned for business strategy. He is probably the most famous business academic in the world. He has worked with all the big corporations to devise their business strategies. Originally an economist, made strategist, he pretty much invented modern business strategy. While researching economics, he believed that several functions could easily be applied to business strategy; to essentially give companies, and advantage over their competition, that could not be mimicked, thereby creating a monopoly of supply to consumers. Nearly every major corporate business plan in the world, is inspired his book 'Competitive Advantage'. It outlines the research that shows; When all products are similar, the price between them is small because people aren't willing to pay any greater value, for a compared product when its so similar to a lower priced product. This is essentially a perfectly-competitive-market.

The solution to this, he says is to develop a strategy that is a Sustainable competitive advantage. This creates a situation that turns your efforts into something like a monopoly, granted by the uniqueness and the difficulty for other competing firms or people to copy your competitive business offering. He writes “Competitive advantage grows fundamentally out of the value a firm is able to create for its buyers that exceeds the firms cost of creating it. Value is what buyers are willing to pay, and superior value stems from providing – unique benefits that more than offset a higher price” Porter, M.E. (1985) Seth Godin, goes on to explain this in more radical terms, he states “While driving through France a few years ago, my family and I were enchanted by the hundreds of storybook cows grazing in lovely pastures right next to the road. For dozens of kilometers, we all gazed out the window, marveling at the beauty. Then, within a few minutes, we started ignoring the cows. The new cows were just like the old cows, and what was once amazing was now common. Worse than common: It was boring. Cows, after you've seen them for a while, are boring. They may be well-bred cows, Six Sigma cows, cows lit by a beautiful light, but they are still boring. A Purple Cow, though: Now, that would really stand out. The essence of the Purple Cow -- the reason it would shine among a crowd of perfectly competent, even undeniably excellent cows -- is that it would be remarkable. Something remarkable is worth talking about, worth paying attention to. Boring stuff quickly becomes invisible.” Godin, S. (2003)

When a product is unique, and cannot be mimicked by other competing firms, it can demand as high a price as it likes from the consumer, because the value it creates, by solving needs that can't be met by other producers, benefit the consumer immensely. (There benefit is referred to as consumer surplus in economics). When you look around, you can see that every marketplace, rewards innovation! When people see something that benefits their utility, they pay attention. “The fastest growing churches are the newest ones. The best-selling books are always the surprise hits that come out of nowhere – Products and services like those require initiative to produce” Seth Godin, (2008:31) Leadership; can have this same dramatic effect. Everyone looking to one person, yet inter-connected to each other. When people look to leadership it causes them to constantly strive to be higher up the pyramid, closer to the benefits that leaders receive! Consumer surplus, is about achieving the greatest benefit for the lowest cost. And if you can receive a relationship with another firm or individual, that will result in greater utility. (like being associated with a leader would) then you are likely to become more successful and listened to by other members of the tribe, thereby having some kind of mesmerizing effect. We've on purposely left out any mathematics when covering economics, and focused on the moral beliefs of the characters who brought about economics. However, undoubtedly Math, is a huge part of economics. Perhaps understandably “Many people have a natural resistance to the idea that human behaviour can be understood in a scientific way. After all, how can we possibly understand something as complex and unpredictable as the human mind, with its emotions, creativity,

imagination and ability to learn? How can we put loving, hating, poetry-writing human beings into a mathematical formula.” Beinhocker, E. (2007:115) When something is shown to be true in math, its different to that of when something is shown to be true in empirical scientific research. Empirical research, is a pursuit, to gain a higher goal 'to uncover truth'. Its the believe that the truth is out there, and that we can look under our microscopes and double-blind studies, and we will have a closer understanding by analysing the statistics, and what truth might look like for various bits of knowledge. However, this means we can never see science directly, we can never actually see what the higher universe of logic-knowledge-truth actually looks like! We can only guess based on the evidence we have. Induction from empirical evidence has problems; A typical inductivist position could be - “I've seen a lot of white swans, therefore all swans are white' – is unsustainable. Induction produces a conclusion based on a limited number of observations which applies to a much larger number of possible observations. The number of possible observations may even be infinite. “If I see 1000 white swans, there is still the logical possibility of an infinite number of the other, unobserved swans, so the probability of the statement 'all swans are white' being true is zero. Johnson, S. Jackson, R. Maslin, K. et al. (2005) John Stuart Mill wrote “Though scientific research a valid process, it is a fallible one, and fallible in very different degrees” and that Logical Deduction, such from mathematics, “Gives us no new knowledge; everything we conclude from a deduction such as a syllogism is actually already known in the major premise (e.g. if we know that all men are mortal, we also know

that Socrates is mortal; we don't need to prove it). He says of this example 'the inference is finished when we have assered that all men are mortal. What remains to be performed afterwards is merely deciphering our own notes'. Johnson, S. Jackson, R. Maslin, K. et al. (2005:149) As John Stuart Mill Shows, like the premise, all men are mortal. Math is a self contained system, where every function, relates to every other function. When you show something in mathematics, there is no doubt, no guesswork, it is knowledgetruth-proven because it is already defined as part of the whole. How can you relate the world of mathematics built in numbers, to our concerns as human beings, how can it teach us anything about our lives? Smith, Bentham, and Mill. These early economists regarded themselves as philosophers rather than scientists, and the mathematics of the classic period is generally limited to a few numerical examples and a bit of algebra, but nothing more sophisticated Beinhocker, E. (2007:30) But later Walras wrote a book called Elements in which he turned various economic rules into demonstrative mathematical models; many of which were later turned into mathematical proofs, this turned the field of economics, into a math-based logic driven science. A math proof, is something that is defined in pure logic alone, its something that has been proven as of itself, as defined in its wider system, The big bang is an example of this. Stephen Hawkins solved the problem of how all matter came into existence, the way he did this was to simply reverse the already discovered equations of how matter disappeared out of existence, which was calculated by predicting (built from inductive-scientific-observation) the effects inside black holes.

Walras, L. (1954) was “convinced that if the equations of differential calculus could capture the motions of planets and atoms of the universe, these same mathematical techniques could also capture the motion of human minds in the economy.“ Beinhocker: (2005:30). Warlas was right, because later in the 20th century, mathematical models were built that merged Einstein's General Relativity theory with Cosmology. How do they do it? How do they build mathematical models, that create a self-contained system. A good example of this, is how Stephen Hawkins modelled the Big Bang. By using computer models, we can plug mathematical variables into a system, and see how the values of the micro-elements of individual features, (like the value of gravity, or the decision of agents) affects the whole. If the whole system, suddenly springs into existence because of the right values being present, then this demonstrates the math is correct. The Big Bang can be shown to work, providing the right numerical value for gravity, dark matter, the vibration of the component part of atoms, and other variables are defined Stephen Hawking (1989). The universe only works in computer models, when precise numerical equations are present, and even the slightest change to these values causes the universe simply not to exist in our computer models. This same processing of modeling values is been used to build attempts at artificial intelligence. To create beings that exist in the realm of compute code and mathematics. Various evolutionary systems have been built inside computer models, (For example Sugarscape. Epstein, J. Axtell, R. (1996) Such systems entirely rely on numerical inter-related mathematics in order to define the laws of agents, that forms a community, and

even further, macro-economic effects, from this initial defined logic. Beinhocker, E. (2007) Using processes like these, its possible, as least in theory to build a mathematical model of human decision making. And to mathematically define, what procedures cause people to believe certain information over competing ideas Dawkins, R (1986:117) Epstein and Axtell in 1996 wanted to see if simple agents in a simple landscape could create something like an economy. By defining the computer code of individual decision-basedeconomic motivations of these agents, with the right set of motivations, should cause interaction between them that spring to life higher functions like macro-economics within the computer model. Thus each agent had a basic set of rules that it followed during each turn of the game. These are limited foresight (the agent could only perceive so far of the logical plane, and not envision a higher logical plane), using this ability, it could determine within its field of perception which location had the most energy supply to contain its existence. The agent moves to the square and consumes the energy. The agent is credited by the amount of sugar eaten and debited by the amount of sugar burned by its metabolism. If it eats too much, it stores the energy up for the future. If it uses more energy than it consumes. It falls out of existence. Beinhocker, E. (2007:82) The behaviour of the agents in sugarscape was, vastly, vastly simpler than the behaviour of real people. The agents in sugarscape could only eat, move, reproduce and trade – nonetheless these are all real human activities that are potentially relevant for understanding econmic phenomena.

There was nothing in sugarscape that real people do not or cannot do. Beinhocker, E. (2007:116) So how can mathematics solve questions such as What motivates people to build relationships together rather than every man, woman and child for themselves? Why do people get married, live together and have children? This problem of 'allocating the payoffs from cooperation' was mathematically solved by John Nash (The film, A beautiful mind, Goldsman, A. Nasar, S. (2001), was made about him) in a paper he wrote in 1950, that solved game theory. Imagine lots of separate software companies exist, that write computer programs, they all decide to collectively increase their prices, thereby forcing their customers to have no choice but to pay the higher fee for their product, as they are all acting as one firm it will be difficult for a small producer of software to compete. A good example of this, is all the companies in the world drilling for oil, collectively they join up and set a price per barrel that they all have to sell oil at, according to most economic areas this is illegal, but by doing this, all of these firms making higher profits while still being technically separate companies. People do the same, when we work together, we form monopolistic forces, and we each end up with more benefit than that we could have acquired separately. Rather than “2 + 2 = 4” its a magic synergy that means “2 + 2 = 5”. There are four basic sources of relationships between people, that cause both parties to have higher utility than the sum of their parts; (1)division of labour; you split the tasks that need to be done and specialize in each area separately, therefore increasing productivity (2) The homogeneity of people. Their different needs and tastes create opportunities to trade for mutual benefit.

(Comparative Advantage) (3) increasing returns to scale i.e. more people working for a prize increases the odds of achieving it. (4) cooperation smooths out uncertainties over time. i.e. if one person has a bad day where they don't provide benefit, the other might be having a good day, and then they switch roles again. Thereby constantly delivering benefit to one another. Beinhocker, E. (2007) “Evolution has steered us in a direction whereby we are naturally inclined to be cooperative to capture the riches of nonzero-sum games” that is to say, Evolution has programmed into our mental software sophisticated, intuitive “Nash equilibrium finders”. Beinhocker, E. (2007) Having more utility benefit, is a motivating factor for all agents, such as humans... therefore we are mathematically inclined to form relationships. Relationships dramatically increase utility. The reason we become attracted to someone in the first place, is because they stick out as the most profitable choice compared to the competition. As several research study shows, romantic attraction is more dynamic...than just personality features... for example commonality amongst partners, etc. the other important element is strategic enterprise. These Social Exchange & Equity models also outline the process of mate selection and relationship formation resembles a marketplace in which people attempt to maximize their rewards and make social interaction as profitable as possible by exchanging their own assets – beauty, health, intelligence, a sense of humour, kindness, wealth, status and so on – for desirable attributes in a partner. A person’s own value as a potential partner is presumed to influence the extent to which he or she is able to attract and retain a high value partner. Because

people seek the best possible value in a potential mate but are constrained by their own value, this process results in the pairing of individuals of roughly equal value. We want more. But we are constrained by what we have, therefore we get into relationships that are what we have, but are always left wanting more from them. Regan, P (2003:102) Balance, equity, and exchange theories, show that people are strategically' attracted to those with whom an exchange of resources would be in approximate equilibrium Berscheid, E. Walster, E., (1974); Clark, M.S. Reis, H.T. (1988); Rusbult, Buunk, (1993). However, when we finally attempt to form a 'team' with sexual partners, or any form of relationship in general with people, we experience, disagreements. We struggle to form teams that actually work! That actually produce more than the sum of their parts, . The phenomena that makes such a collaboration the work of fantasy, a dream, an ambition, is called Phenomenology. We've all had the experience that despite making a great deal of effort to explain something to a friend, they still seem unable to understand. Or our boss at work constantly seems annoyed that we aren't working quite as hard as he would hope, that somehow we don't understand the dreams of the company. Our position in life depends on supporting factors that although viable to ourselves, are invisible to those we are trying to build a relationship with. For example, when the a public company performs all the analysis in order to determine what its stock price should be it

comes out 15% higher than the stock price set by the public markets, who believe that the value of the company is worth less. The bosses of the company see the opportunities for the company, and how the company can achieve them with a greater deal of clarity than can its audience. The law of one price states that a market (with enough information) is able to generate a single price for a economic product or a activity, this is referred to as a market equilibrium. Equilibrium is a state of balance, where everyone agrees that the prices of things should be as they are, they are perfectly accurate. However, this has been shown to be impossible to achieve. For the prices in the public financial markets to reach equilibrium would take a million trillion years, and companies will never be completely happy with the value placed on them. As we have already covered, according to Expected Utility, people try to act like firms, therefore people believe they are 15% more valuable, than the ratings by others. Our relationships with others are always in a state of disequilibrium, a constant state of negotiating the power balance, where one agent in the collaboration attempts to get the other player to value their efforts 15% more. Yet the other player tries to keep them negotiated down to 15% less. Loss aversion creates an asymmetry that makes agreements difficult to reach. The concessions you make to me are my gains, but they are your losses; they cause you much more pain than they give me pleasure. Inevitably, you will place a higher value on them than I do. The same is true, of course, of the very painful concessions you demand from me, which you do not appear to value sufficiently!

Animals, including people, fight harder to prevent losses than to achieve gains. In the world of territorial animals, this principle explains the success of defenders. A biologist observed that “when a territory holder is challenged by a rival, the owner almost always wins the contest—usually within a matter of seconds.” (p296,Daniel Kahnemann – Thinking fast and slow) Disequilibrium causes a swing of stock prices, and this same swing occurs always as relationships try to negotiate price. Therefore we cannot ever have a direct collaboration of efforts, or beliefs with those we form relationships with, and thus never a team in the true sense of the word, we constantly negotiate with our teammate; Which ideas are more valuable? What activities are our priority? Who holds the majority of the power balance?. “Most researchers interested in exploring partner preferences focus on what people – that is, on the characteristics or attributes they seek in potential, and often idealized, partners. However, one of the realities of human existence in general – and certainly that of human mating – is that to quote a famous rock groups lyrics “You can’t always get what you want.” In other words, although we might ideally want to date or marry someone with a particular set of attributes. Perhaps the desired partner is so attractive that he or she has many mating choices and we are merely one among the many possible options. – the ability to make compromises in the arena of sex, love and mating is extremely important. For example if most people were unwilling to deviate from their ideal standards – then little actual mating would take place.” Everyone would be stuck in limbo waiting for that ‘perfect partner’. Regan, P. (2003:155)

So if there is such a difficulty in valuing the efforts of others, and valuing ourselves. How then are we expected to value beliefs and decisions with greater precision. Although people are motivated by the perfect-rationality of a well formed collaboration. Or the constant pursuit for higher utility. We struggle with considering the vast quantity of factors involved. Without such complexity, we would be able to accurately predict what decisions humans are likely to make, with absolute perfection. We could build models to analyze what decision would a person make under certain circumstances. However this is just a dream, a motivating goal. Therefore Decision Economics was developed by academics and mathematicians as a 'plug' to solve this difficulty. According to a Economic model the term ‘Decision’ is simply an inductive way of analysing information from a agentenvironment perspective. There is a whole host of debate that occurs when you reduce human thought down to experiences that are entirely circumstance dependent, i.e. the economics of the circumstance dictate the selected decision. [16] Mook, D. G. (1987) this makes it a behaviourist theory because it focuses on behaviour and ignores “thoughts, feelings, and other internal events” it believes that these are “not part of the causes of action. They are actions, to be explained in turn. They are caused by the same environmental events that cause the external, overt behaviour.” This model, of looking at the world i.e. economics directly applied to human decision making is referred to as Bounded rationality, it shows our thoughts and feelings to be agentreprsentations that are formed top-down from the resources available, within a higher economic frame' [7] Wilson, R. Kiel, F.

(1997) people fill specific information gaps, with the information that they believe (from bounded-rational frame) will result in the largest expected gains. The research for this model comes from recent research in fields that are exporting logic from economics and merging them into biology/evolution and sociological sciences. “Increasingly since the 1970s, the expected utility model has been used as a mechanism to explain human behaviour outside the traditional province of economics. Under the influence of economists like Becker, sociologists such as Coleman, and legalists like Posner, choices affecting behaviour within families, voting in elections, law-making, criminal activity and drugtaking, and even church attendance and giving have been gathered into the Neoclassical fold. So wide-reaching has become the ambit of the model that its name became popularised as "rational choice theory" to emphasise its "non-economic" relevance. Where psychology has over six hundred separate conflicting models of assuming the likely motivations of human consciousness, bringing a statistically verifiable bounded rationality to the table offers many benefits to anticipating what actions people are likely to take when under various social pressures. There are popular theories that successfully blend economics with psychological models, their main skill is accounting for biases in problem solving, judgment and choice The most fruitful, popular alternative theories spring from the idea that “limits on computational ability force people to use simplified procedures or ‘heuristics’ that cause systematic mistakes (biases) in problem solving, judgment, and choice Simon, H. (1978) These

rational-choice theorists, have plenty of research to support[8] that the following conditions (with some minor adaptations) are true of all economic agents. “I) People have rational preferences among outcomes that can be identified and associated with a value. II) Individuals maximize utility and firms maximize profits. Iii) People act independently on the basis of full and relevant information. “ [3] From the discussion into economics thus far, we could draw the conclusion, that human beings have a desperate need to continue existence. As perhaps all things that exist do! (Else perhaps they wouldn't exist!) Whether this is the smallest of bacteria or computer models of an amoeba like those seen in Sugarscape. We exist, by leveraging every unique feature we have, to prevent imitation by our competition, and to form alliances where necessary. By doing this we have a kind of monopoly. Increasing our likelihood of survival. Our cognitive faculty of attention, by its very nature, has no choice but to guide your focus, and place your concentration on those things that seem to offer us a better chance. In stark contrast to other old-psychological models, for example Sigmund Freud concept of ID, EGO and Superego, this model relies heavily on calculating the expected utility of an activity considering the context of human social activities, all activities that humans participate in have a price usually expressed in (£) GBP or ($) US Dollars. There's ways to calculate a price, for example you could consider emotional investment by a potential mate to be;

Hours thinking about you @ £/$ value of her hours. = Emotional investment. And then compare this against her other hobbies/interests or potential sexual mates and then discount this against her other opportunities, then the highest value in £/$ would be her highest commitment, probably akin to an emotion such as love. (As we tend to value our time and effort with a kind of love as powerful as the detail that we understand our own development through life history) This might seem like a haphazard model, but the general idea is that you take the most significant variables and you then look for a price, the way we would establish the cost of her per hour, would be how much she is likely to gain if she devoted her efforts to work. The reason we select only the opportunity that is the most beneficial to be the one that we are in love with, is because, we value our pursuits as goal setting has been shown as integral to the sense of wholeness and well-being in the personality, and therefore the lack of following their most beneficial pursuit is likely to result in a sense of personality imbalance. The difficulty in predicting what action is likely to result in the most beneficial result, is that we live in a unpredictable terrain, i.e. we are not sure what’s likely to happen in the future, and we have limited perception of the all the information we need to know to make a full decision. Therefore we are constantly in a state of balance then imbalance ad infinum. When we walk around a shopping precinct, we are constantly looking for the 'best offer' that illusive thing that will make us have a better life, at little cost! Perhaps it’s a new snakeskin jacket, or glittered shoes, but we imagine by owning the best quality, that we will lead a higher quality existence.

The traditional model (Neoclassical Economic behaviour) assumes that people only care about the outcome of economic decisions, and not the process that people go through in making them. If we are to more accurately predict, what decision someone is likely to make, we must consider the considerable time and effort involved in the process of decision-making. And its this “Plug” between our true motivation, and our limitations is called Bounded Rationality. This new field has recently produced a 67 Noble Prize Winners including Daniel Kahneman: 2002, Vernon Smith: 2002, and Herbert Simon: 1978 to name a few. When you make a choice, you typically place various limits on yourself, like how long your long your going to spend solving this problem, how much data your going to recall from memory to compare against, and the like. Before academia studied mental heuristic models of economics, the model of human decision making didn't consider things like bargaining, fairness and coercion... people look to the benefits that their peers receive, in order to determine whether they got a fair deal. Beinhocker (2005) To attempt to make the most beneficial decision, considering all the probabilities on which cause of action or belief is most likely to result in higher utility compared against all the others. Is a computation that humans simply aren't intelligent enough to make. In 1985 Alain Lewis used sophisticated mathematical models from the theory of computation that mathematically proved no one, not even the smartest arbitrageur, could actually make the calculations described according to expected utility theory. Lewis (1985) also shown by Steven pinker (1997), Clark, A. (2001), Dennett, D.(1991)

Therefore people use various cognitive biases, to shortcut this mathematically in-computable decision process. These are; Framing Biases “Exactly how an issue is framed can effect how we think about it” , Representativeness “People have a bad habit of drawing big conclusions from very small and biased samples”, Availability Biases “People tend to make decisions based on data that is easily available as opposed to finding the data that is really needed to make a good decision” , Difficulties Judging risk “People find it difficult to discount decision probability trees”, Superstitious reasoning “People confuse random chance with cause and effect. They connect unrelated things” , mental accounting “people store information in separate compartments of their mind, that never get compared to the information in another compartment. Beinhocker, (2005:122) These biases allow persuaders and marketeers play on our wants and desires, and create wants and desires that we didn't have. Lewis Carroll stated in her book “The hunting shark”, that “What I tell you three times is true” there’s plenty of examples of this, “A rumor once went around that McDonald's used ground earthworms in its hamburgers. Sales plummeted as much as 30 per cent in some areas. Practically nobody believed the rumor. No one believed a big corporation would risk its billion dollar brand, and do such a thing. The point is, things no one believes, still affect behaviour” Poundstone, W. (2010:200). Professional walk-around magicians have long known that it doesn't matter if an participant notices how a trick is done, he knows that as he continues his performance, the participant will become so amazed, that even if they understood how a small part of the performance works, they will still applaud the performance to be be amazing and impossible, failing to deduce

the entire workings of the magic trick. They know that they will “get them eventually.” Good liars know “Deny everything” because they know that, the listener will have little choice but to believe the liar after he's repeated himself several times. To understand the effect of economics on what we can get people to do, and think, we need to look at mental heuristics, this will help us understand how suggestion influences peoples perception. We've all had the experience of yawning, and then watching many of our friends begin yawning in response. There has been a great deal of research into why we mimic the decisions, and behaviors of our peers. In the bounded-rationality model of economics for understanding human decision making, an important concept was devised, this concept is Priming. Kahneman, states that, “Words and other stimuli activate relevant mental processes. Once 'switched on', this cognitive machinery remains accessible for a while, influencing subsequent thoughts and actions. When priming affects the estimation of number values, psychologists call it anchoring.” Poundstone, W(2010:94) “Anchoring effects are mostly caused by the fact that when I ask you if the tallest redwood is more than 800 feel tall, I have primed you to think of very tall trees” Explains Kahneman “The sample of trees you recover from memory is biased upwards” Poundstone, W(2010:94). In one study, a four digit number was wrote on a post-it-note attached to a questionnaire. participants were asked to write it

down into their candidate number for the questionnaire before completing the paper. During the questionnaire one question asked “Please estimate how many doctors you expect there to be in the local phone book” even though, their candidate number was unrelated doctors, or phone books, higher candidate numbers caused significantly more participants to write higher estimates. Later when they modified the study to make participants pay attention to the candidate number. The extra second of attention on the number increased the correlation to be three times as close to the candidate number Davis, M. Marslen-Wilson, W. Gaskell, G. (1997) The concept anchoring states that “If you say something is valuable then people will believe it” for example in a study where participants in a auction placed bids on items, the opening bet was randomly selected price in US dollars from a number between 1-100. It was shown that items that had a high opening price, resulted in a significantly higher bet than those that started with a low opening price” Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G. and D. Prelec, (2003) The highest price paid for an item was the Keyboard, the researchers purposely tried to choose an item that they believed the bidders would find difficult to price, as the frequency of exposure to an item/idea allows us to more closely compare values from other experiences. The researchers state “We wanted something where people don't have a strong reference price. They needed a brand new product to price, so they selected a keyboard.” Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G. and D. Prelec, (2003)

Many of us have probably been to Harrods, Self fridges, Harvey Nicholas and other expensive high street stores, and noticed the £1,000,000 mobile phone, or the £7,500,000 watch! And we wonder, who the hell buys a £7.5million watch... the answer probably is not a lot of people, or more realistically no one. Its the advice of many consulting firms that specialize in pricing for retail outlets that by having high price products on display, makes people feel a lot more comfortable paying £120 for a keyring. Or £900 for a handbag, much higher than those shoppers would have originally paid. These are examples of the illusion of value, and people who don't understand the cost of producing a watch, or jewelry are likely to fall for it, providing they aren't influenced by other sources of price. There are various reasons why people fall victim to these illusions, according to Researcher Jehiel, P. (2003); I) Limited foresight – players can only predict the near future ii) Analogybased expectation formulation, - Players take an average conditioned sequence of events from past analogies to anticipate the future Iii) The Grouping similar information to predict future scenarios The more rare an item is, the more difficult it is to compare against other products and therefore allocate a 'fair' price for the item. If I told you a “Jum Jam” was worth £2million but I’m willing to do you a deal, you might be interested in buying it.” These external cues of value, cause “Automatic brain processes – whether cognitive or affect – they whir along all the time, even when we dream, constituting most of the electro-chemical activity in the brain... Attention, for example, is largely

controlled by automatic processes, and attention in turn determines what information we absorb. You can be doing your taxes, when a cricket ball crashes through the window. You don't decide to look up and see what makes the noise. Its automatic” Poundstone, W. (2011) People are constantly attempting to optimize to increase their utility. Every cell in the human body, every atom in space, is seeking further existence, by utilizing the very best of its opportunities. Its possible that when we Yawn, the reason everyone copies us, is because they are attempting the evaluate whether 'now' is the best time to rest in order to further their productivity in the future. However, this question of whether 'is now the best time to rest' is a leading question that is biased to incline us to conjure up all of the reasons that we might be tired, and therefore become it. We constantly hear this phrase thrown about from popular psychology, that “You can't change a first impression”, which emphasizes the importance of introductions. The other day I heard a man introduce himself as “I’m older than Brad Pitt but younger than Mick Jagger”, this anchors the man as a gentleman with similar characteristics as those he's referred to, and then your mind will begin to search for similar features amongst those three people mentioned. For a while now when asked, Where you live? I've replied, “I sleep between hotels around the world”, whether its believed or not is somewhat irrelevant, if the person can engage their

attention on such places, and feel emotionally involved with my character, then its likely belief will follow. Today's behavioral decision theorists, believe, the people who are successful at it [persuasion] are good at exploiting their partners limited attention and bounded-rationality” from my experience, the people who are best at this, are those who's job it is to amaze and deceive. Few magicians believe in free will, they are quite often a skeptical bunch, they realize that, their misdirection causes audiences to pay attention to “A, B, and C, rather than X, Y, and Z” the audiences believe they saw everything of importance, or at any rate could have seen everything” had they chosen not to follow the attention of the performer Poundstone, W. (2011:213) Economics teaches us; the origins of value, how the price of value is dictated by competition, the motivations of the human spirit, and has shown us that by having people; pay attention, be frequently exposed to priming, and the source, all are fundamentally important, for understanding; persuasion. Bounded rationality shows us that humans anticipate the future from modeling their limited interpretation of their current experience, as pointed out “Humans and other animals need to make inferences about their environment under constraints of limited time, knowledge, and computational capacities. (Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Vol 133, (1997, 201–218)” and they use this to infer, the level of risk seeking vs risk avoidant behavior necessary to achieve the greatest utility. If we can exaggerate these conditions of limited time, knowledge and data, we can begin to understand the reason why people in highly pressurized situations such as financial trading, often

seem, not quite as rational as we might hope, and lead our economies to crash! This risk-seeking behavior is the kind that will cause our audiences, to more engaged and quick to be primed to the anchor realities we present, during this experience it becomes entirely necessary for our participants to engage in superstitious thinking, to over-generalize the rules we present. Sudden moments of attention, are not a choice. They are environment defined, they are external cues of value, cause “Automatic brain processes – whether cognitive or affect – they whir along all the time, even when we dream, constituting most of the electro-chemical activity in the brain... Attention, for example, is largely controlled by automatic processes, and attention in turn determines what information we absorb. You can be doing your taxes, when a cricket ball crashes through the window. You don't decide to look up and see what makes the noise. Its automatic” Poundstone,. W (2010:211) by engaging the attention, and offering realities, we can build responsive agents. Our brains, are not designed to indicate whats important, for our focus, only whats emergent. Perls, F. Hefferline, R. Goodman, P. (1977) Magicians have long exploited the unconscious machinery directing the roving gaze of attention... In the lore of magic, misdirection is best accomplished with objects that are moving rather than still: alive rather than inanimate; odd rather than familiar... One of the canons of magic is 'a big move covers a small move.' to deflect attention from a little suspicious action, do something big and suspicious. The small move seems less suspicious by comparison and is ignored. The simple ruse works because the mind is always joining vagrant perceptions into the illusion of a perfect,

seamless, real-time map of the surrounding world.” Poundstone,. W; (2010:213) We want to create these powerful moments in the minds of our peers, so they become victim of our persuasion, and believe with absolute clarity whatever we imply.

Attention, Utility, and consumption “A single idea, can be so persuasive that it can, engulf and entire being, and become the basis for every thought they make. In short an idea is a parasite, like a virus.” – Richard Dawkins This unique advantage that distinguishes one thing from another in a really clear understandable way can be the difference for businesses between making huge profits, or financial ruin. Richard Dawkins, a famous evolutionist, outlined a model stating that ideas fight competitively, like that of genes’ they fight for survival amongst other ideas, and the ones that are particularly unique have a competitive advantage and are accepted. He called ideas ‘Meme’s. Although people can carefully attend to and elaborate on the content of a persuasion message, they can also process the message quite superficially, attending only to cues peripheral to its content such as the length of the message and the source of the message. We attempt to characterize these two modes of processing - systematic and heuristic - and to specify the conditions that trigger and govern a specific mode of processing. We haten to add that the two modes of information processing (systematic vs heuristic) are not linked in one-to-one fashion with the types of informational cues (message content vs other cues) as suggested by some researchers Kruglanski & Thomson (1999). What we believe is that people can engage in systematic

or heuristic processing. People can scrutinize cues peripheral to the message content, or they can process the message content heuristically. Dillard, James. Pfau, M. (2002:195) Earlier cognitive theories focused on how people process the quality of persuasion messages McGuire, W. J. (1968). For example, persuasion effects were conceptualized in terms of the attention allocated to the message, the comprehension of the message content, and the acceptance of the message conclusions Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L. and Kelley, H. H. (1953) However; People rarely process information in perfect conditions (Where the speaker has a monopoly of value) There are both environmental and cognitive constraints on information processing. These constraints have given rise to the metaphor of the cognitive miser Fiske, S.T., & Taylor, S.E. (1991) In this metaphor, people are economy-minded, investing cognitive effort in a task only when given sufficient motivation and cognitive resources. Consistent with this assumption, the HSM posits that people engage in systematic processing of persuasive information only when they are sufficiently motivated. In a systematic mode, people consider all relevant pieces of information and form a judgement based on these elaborations. However if people are not sufficiently motivated or do not have sufficient cognitive resources, they can engage in superficial or heuristic processing of available information. In heuristic mode, people consider a few informational cues - or even a single informational cue - and form a judgement based on these cues. for instance, such cues may be the source of the message or the length of the message, that is people use a simple decision rule such as "Experts can be trusted" to arrive at a conclusion instead of scrutinizing the quality of the persuasive arguments.

If we are going to communicate a message, it needs to relate to the unique qualities that define our position, against our competitors and customize it towards the audience that we want to communicate. Although consumption is fundamental to all forms of life, human consumption is extraordinary in its variety and sheer inventiveness. Some physical consumption, such as food and water, is essential for basic survival and thus shared with other organisms, but humans are remarkable in the scale of consumption over and above meeting basic needs, and indeed in the way that even “basic” consumption is embellished and elaborated—consider, for example, the sheer number of brands of bottled water. We do not buy a product simply because it tastes or looks good, but we also take into account the persona that surrounds the brand, known as brand character. When thinking about a brand, be it clothing, sports goods, food or drink, we immediately conjure up ideas about the type of person who buys and uses or wears it. One example of the effectiveness of branding and advertising can be seen through the two similar products, Diet Pepsi was perceived as feminine, which deterred men from buying the product even though market research had suggested that timing was perfect to introduce diet soft drinks to a male market, as a response the Pepsi Max brand was launched under a different image. The advertising that surrounded this ‘new’ product reinforced the notion of breaking boundaries, being active, cool and the centre of attention, which drew in the male agent. “Desire is prompted first and foremost by exposure to the brand, whether exposure is seeing a friend wearing Diesel Jeans, or a PT

cruiser drive down the street, it triggers interest in the brand” Lindstrom, M. and Seybold, P. B. (2003:59) On the other hand, brands are symbols of aspirations, representing desired selfqualities, such as sophistication or power. Thus, brand priming may well activate goals linked with these desired outcomes and thus elicit goal-directed behaviour.” Fitzsimons, Chartrand, T. Fitzsimons, G. (2008) Indeed, much of the psychological value consumers obtain from brands appears to come from brands’ ability to fulfil their personality and identity motivations. In representing desired qualities of self - such as; sophistication or manliness, brands such as Tiffany or Hummer are goal relevant in nature, symbolizing aspirations or unattained goals. In particular, some brands may represent “be” or ideal-self goals (e.g., to be sophisticated), which describe people’s aims to improve themselves Carver, C. Scheier, M. (2002) Gollwitzer, P. M., & Moskowitz, G. B.(1996) Just as exposure to role models—people who represent success—can inspire goal-directed action, so too should exposure to brands that symbolize success at a given goal. Fitzsimons, Chartrand, T. Fitzsimons, G. (2008) This concept that increases the prevalence of ideas is mere exposure. This essentially is the concept that the frequency, or repetition of hearing an idea or seeing a person. Causes us to more admire, be attracted to and see similarity between their ideas, attitudes, and personality as our own, therefore causing us to more easily take on board their ideas. Mere exposure, is a concept that says, that when we are only partially exposed to an idea portrayed repetitively that we are

more attracted and pleased to see that thing presented. As an idea we are more likely to accept it as truth. This essentially is the concept that the frequency, or repetition of hearing an idea or seeing a person. Causes us to more admire, be attracted to and see similarity between their ideas, attitudes, and personality as our own….therefore causing us to more easily take on board their ideas. Generally speaking, attraction is based on the frequency of interactions, and the proximity of exposure to another person. In one study it was found that the more often employees bumped into each other in the office environment the more likely they are to form romantic relations. Research has shown that repeated exposure to a stimulus can lead to a more positive, or less negative, evaluation of the stimulus Zajonc, R. (1968). Thus, employees who interact during their daily work routines can become attracted to one another because of their repeated social contact. Indeed, a vast amount of the literature on repeated exposure supports the claim that ‘mere exposure of the individual to a stimulus is a sufficient condition for the enhancement of his attitude toward it. Individuals who are ‘encountered more frequently seem to elicit greater feelings of attraction from us, even though often little or no social interaction has taken place’”. Pierce, C. Byrne, D. Aguinis, H. (1998) What natural conditions create mere exposure? In a pioneering study, Leon Festinger, Stanley Schaehter and Kurt Back (1950) studied students attending the university of Massachusetts institute of technology. They were interested in who the students made friends with, as determined by proximity.

Physical distance measures the contact encouraged by the design and relative positions in the environment (i.e. adjoining houses could have front walkways leading in opposite directions). Functional distance modifies physical distance because peoples paths may be mere likely to cross if they share mailboxes, walkways, or parking. The smaller the functional distance, the more likely people are to bump into each other and perhaps become friends. Two types of housing provided a natural replication of the researchers study. In one, Westgate West, apartments on the same floor shared common entrance porches in a two-story building with external stairs between floors. In the other Westgate Court, the duplex houses shared a common courtyard with shared paths to the street. In both housing complexes, researchers measured the distance between peoples apartments – that is, proximity – as a predictor of friendship. Residents nominated their top three contacts. Within one floor of Westgate, west, over 41% of the top choices were next door neighbours, with other 22% more being next but one. People’s seemingly arbitrary assignment to apartments determined that nearly two thirds of their friends would be within a door or two of their own place. “Susan T. Fiske (2009) It’s been shown by numerous studies that “People remember people associated with positive things but forget people associated with negative things. An increasing amount of data suggests that stimulus familiarity increases with stimulus positivity” that is to say that we think positive experiences are familiar. For example we might recognize a smiling person, who makes direct eye contact with us, thinking we’ve met them before. But not recognize someone we know but looks sad or depressed. Berscheid. Walster. (1972)

If your associated with positivity your likely to be remembered and preached about. This is why in car adverts they feature glamorous locations, and sexy women, these items have little to do with cars, most people don’t take their fancy Mercedes Benz when travelling abroad. And most people only can afford cars like Mercedes Benz when they are near retirement and therefore are perhaps unlikely to have a girl on their arm like shown in those adverts. (That’s not to imply anything disrespectful to older women). Other than an idea being unique, it’s the frequency and proximity of exposure to that person or thing that increases your liking of it and your engagement with it. This is why many companies will have a cheap product that they will distribute to huge numbers of people and offer an upgrade for the premium and advance version of the package. For instance Sky television (a Satellite TV company equivalent to cable TV in the us) have a basic package of £20-00 then to get their movie channels, entertainment channels and sport channels you pay an increased fee. 75% of UK society could afford the Sky basic package; by getting the majority of people involved then you can easily upgrade these people later on to the full package. By doing this you reach a much wider audience and make larger profits. When we try and decide what product to buy, it’s a very difficult decision. Well perhaps you, the reader find it easy because you made the highly educated decision to buy this book = ) but seriously, you had little way of knowing whether buying this book was going to help you in any way. Perhaps you knew it might this text might teach you something about hypnotism, or how to influence, or how to seduce. But you had no way of knowing that it was the best product to buy to suit your need.

We, the reader of the advert, don't really have any assessment of whether it’s a good deal. It just depends on whether we want what the product claims to offer us, and if it does manage to do this then the product is worth buying. This is why you can sit courses on Viral Marketing, or Website marketing. And they teach you things like; “List the bullet points of things your customer will gain by buying the product, relating the benefits to them.” In order to prescribe benefits to a person we must know a little information about the person; like what motivates them? Why are they likely looking at your advert? Where have they seen your advert? How old are they? And what sex are they. “When we buy a product we are actively seeking benefit that we desire and believe we will receive as an outcome of ownership and usage of a particular brand and/or product” Morrin, Maureen and S. Ratneshwar (2000) On the internet there are millions of websites set up by webentrepreneurs looking to make a quick buck. They have a long sales letter explaining why you should buy their product, how it’s selling out fast and how it’s the best in the world. These letters emphasize the benefits for the customer while explaining that their product is exclusive and never seen before on the market. And that it’s been reduced from $599-00 to only $89-00 and this is a good deal! The list of benefits is usually explained in bullet points like the below: -

You will have the five ultimate techniques to persuade

anyone to do anything!

-

You will be able to attract any girl

-

You will be getting a product approved by worldwide

experts. Rated by many as the #1 product in the world. -

It’s easy to learn and you will be able to perform it in

two weeks! When reading such an advert you have no way of knowing whether they are telling you a load of lies, without having an indepth knowledge of the topic area. Your only choice for many viewers of the advert is simply to accept the statements within the advert as true and click the buy button. We are all prone to these techniques. The typical website viewer views a site for roughly 22 seconds. But inclusions numerous pages full of easy to read content, image slideshows, and videos causes the viewer to wait for the next event to occur in the video or the next slide in the slideshow, and this typically increases the conversation ratio, meaning that the viewers of the website stay there longer, and are far more likely to buy the product listed on the website as they feel a greater connection with your brand as they have invested more time into viewing your website with a degree of attention. In this complex sensory world on infinite information & possibilities, we find it difficult to know what is a good thing to believe, and what is a bad thing, so we just have to rely on things such as ‘how frequently we’ve heard it’, ‘how emotionally positive it made us feel’, ‘how similar we feel to it’, and ‘the utility benefit it claims it will offer us’. When buying a product from an advertisement, without having an in-depth knowledge of the industry, whether its fashion,

poodles, or eggs - you simply can't make a decent decision about what is best to do without in-depth research. For example, to know whether an advert for a hypnosis product is offering you a good deal you would have to have an in depth knowledge equivalent to that of a post-graduate academic researcher. Also you would need an understanding of the scientific method etc. and then practical experience of performing hypnosis in public. And then if the method of creating responsive audiences involved social factors, for example in my case. You would need experience of socializing and perhaps the seduction community in order to be able to make a decision as to whether the product offering is a good one. What does this discussion into the complexity of buying decisions teach us about influence? It shows us that when people are unable to make a decision based on logical reasoning they rely on other factors. These are typically quite vague attributes, such as; Quality of the brand, Familiarity of the concepts, likeability of the seller. As Branding and Likeability are covered elsewhere in the book, we'd like to discuss the importance of familiarity. How do we before more familiar? And what effects does this have on the influence of our ideas, recommendations, and attractiveness? Mere exposure, is a concept that says, that when we are only partially exposed to an idea portrayed repetitively that we are more attracted and pleased to see that thing presented. As an idea we are more likely to accept it as truth. This essentially is the concept that the frequency, or repetition of hearing an idea or seeing a person. Causes us to more admire, be attracted to and see similarity between their ideas, attitudes, and

personality as our own, therefore causing us to more easily take on board their ideas.

Games, Players and their values "Space Created by Things… Space was, for Plato, a nothingness existing as an entity [itself]… (in the absence of objects, space would still exist, as an empty, boundless container)" Arnheim, Rudolf; (1977) This book began from very humble beginnings; I planned it to be a PowerPoint presentation that I would deliver to students who wanted to learn on a new style of persuasion course. The presentation was developed just-in-case I was asked to speak at any important conference where I wanted to deliver my latest work. This chapter represented a core component of the theory I was looking to publicize; however when I mentioned the concept to others in my field, that I had developed some theories based around “all interaction being a form of bribery” I received negative criticism – and decided being as I didn’t have much evidence to support the theory that – “When you exchange interaction in a conversation you bride each other with the power and resources you have in individual skill sets in order to try and manipulate the other person to give you what you want that they have access to”, that we use interactions to obtain power; I was told that this theory sounded weak, and being as I couldn’t find support from the scientific community to back up my claim I decided to drop that section of theory out of my work. The problem with the theory that people do things for nonfinancial benefits in interaction is that it’s difficult to establish

what kind of benefits people receive from interactions; as many conversations seem to lack any purpose or goal whatsoever. But just because most interactions seem to lack any intent; doesn’t mean people don’t have an underlying motive occasionally that dictates their actions when they are conversing with others. This study of non-financial gain in micro-circumstances (i.e. between two people) is really under researched – as its much easy to look into the actions of large groups of people than study individuals as statistical analysis has further validity that allows the control of factors that influence the research, allowing a degree of control over the variables that you want to see if they correlate i.e. whether one thing affects another. we all live in a world of social encounters; involving us to either participate in accidental contact with strangers or meditated contact i.e. “I need to speak to that girl over there”, or “I need to make contact with this person as I want to propose an idea, but if I don’t approach him on a personal level – as a friend – I will likely be rejected”. I’ve already exposed you to the idea of this book which is that people compete – and they acquire all the resources they possibly can to achieve hedonistic goals (pleasure) without spending too much time, effort & assets. And that certain venues – simply because of the sheer number of people represent a scenario where there are so many people that its difficult to assess whether they are useful as a tool to attain the desire you seek – in other words, people are a means to an end for you, but when there are so many people to choose from who are all relatively similar in apparent attributes then it becomes hard to choose which persons to use.

The additional problem is that our goals (the pleasures we seek) also represent a significant degree of flexibility i.e. we are willing to change the goal-posts (what criteria the goal must meet) based on the resources we can easily acquire. For example; if I was good at sport, or new plenty of sports people perhaps I wouldn’t spent my time producing psychology material but instead focus on becoming a sportsman, or in my case delivering sports psychology workshops. That my goals adequately change based on the scenario I’m in, in order to achieve the greatest utility possible, i.e. the most amount of money, the best quality of life and further unanticipated potential expectations. When we embark on our lives as a young adult, we quickly learn to distinguish ourselves from other people in order to become an individual when it comes to fitting into social groups. We might aim to be the pretty one “she’s so pretty”, “she’s so skinny”, “She’s so intelligent”, “She’s so slutty” – so we have a certain position within certain settings and don’t directly compete with any one of our peers, as to avoid conflicting interests, gaining a monopoly over our unique skillset distribution “he only likes her because she’s pretty”, “he only likes her because she’s rich”, “he only likes her because she’s a slut” this allows us to achieve higher utility without competing with our friends – while fitting into a larger group of people that provides means of social support i.e. “Can I share a lift with you guys” , “let’s go to the movies together, maybe boys will be there”, “Jessica, you’re the smart one, can I study with you”, “Hannah, your hair is so pretty, could you do mine?” As we pass through our teenage years and quickly become an adult we encounter completely different problems – we need to

earn money, as our families help quickly falls away, and our friends become preoccupied with relationships, changing schools, and moving to different cities, we need to quickly rebuild social groups, to act as a breeding group for ideas, to provide social attention, to share problems with, to pursue educational pursuits, hear about work opportunities, to spend time with during the pursuit of the opposite sex and other unanticipated needs. In order to achieve this efficiently, considering the huge portion of people, the quick changing of life circumstances and other things we need to be adaptive; to quickly impress others we meet by weighing up what type of people we want to group with ‘stereotyping’ and moulding how we want to be stereotyped . We seek social differentiation by developing skills – for example choosing what subject to be good at in the eyes of an employer – and perhaps aligning ourselves with similar minded people in that field in order to hear of opportunities, and develop creative thoughts, ways of being that indicate you’re a member of that social category. There isn’t the time, energy, or memory abilities to be good at everything. The fact of the matter is that attention is extremely limited – so you must become different and niche in a set of skills while ignoring other traits that you don’t have time to develop. This intensifies the need for social support as we develop our abilities to be charismatic, humorous, pretty, and also develop capabilities such as the way we speak, the topics we easily find ourselves able to converse in ‘due to rehearsal’ meaning we need to be a member of groups that support our talents, that make us more of a different character while providing socialisation.

When you become a member to a social group, or a label of people, the identification with these other members leads you to develop a sense of self – a clear defined personality, a way of marketing yourself to others who would like to purchase your services and potential employers. If your social group is threatened, by an outside force – another group seeks to destroy your label, or seeks to compete to get the same benefits that your group is trying to acquire, then your group will quickly become a structured organisation to fight against the threat – this can be seen in the case of work unions who suddenly become unionized the moment a competing interest threatens the job security of that industry. "Capacity for the nobler feelings is in most natures a very tender plant, easily killed, not only by hostile influences, but by mere want of sustenance; and in the majority of young persons it speedily dies away if the occupations to which their position in life has devoted them and the society into which it has thrown them, are not favourable to keeping that higher capacity in exercise. Men lose their high aspirations as they lose their intellectual tastes, because they have not time or opportunity for indulging them; and they addict themselves to inferior pleasures, not because they deliberately prefer them, because they are either the only ones to which they have access, or the only ones which they are any longer capable of enjoying" - John Stuart Mill We have to make decisions in our life; to economize in a skill in order to survive – at the loss of our creativity; we bid on particular keywords, ideologies and hope it makes us marketable to a crowd; whether it be in our social life, or our employability. Human behaviour is like a marketplace in the

same way that an economist would look at a financial market, or the way Google decides how to prioritize its search engine results. That when we enter a venue, we are in a marketplace indirectly interacting with countless strangers; and although we are not under the constant and detailed guidance of sophisticated mathematic analysis that decide our behaviours, that dictate the relationships we build and the conversations we have; we nonetheless are determined by a kind of logic. Where we calculate pleasure, avoid expense, and discount the potential win by the probability of risk. Our actions are the product of this logic mixed in with of reflex actions, impulses, instincts, habits, customs, fashions & hysteria. Camerer,C. Loewenstein, G. Prelec, D. (2005) According to the theory that we are using also known as “Social identity theory” - Your personality, is the character traits you show in order to achieve what you want – this is to say that we believe personality is adaptive – situation specific, driven by environmental forces. Sure it is needless to say that people have memories, and these memories give someone a sense of themselves over time, but as time changes so do people. You are defined by the way you arrange component parts of yourself in your life – the way you categorize and label your experiences – using your workplace, your education and study, the books you’ve read, the internet accounts you hold and how you use them, and the friends you keep and the social groups you’re a member of. Earlier on in the economics section of the book; we covered morality and utilitarianism – which covered the pursuit of

hedonistic pleasures; but then included such things as the cost of achieving those pleasures. We seek higher planes of utility – which we are chiefly concerned with “How much we are willing to pay for the fulfilment or satisfaction of our desires” Alfred Marshall. (1920) We; have developed a range of specialisms that make us unique attracted to certain social groups – but an unable to participate in other social groups – That we look for members to form an ‘In Group’ and define ourselves against competing ideas that view our resources, skills, etc. more critically. We locate; social groups that have similar ideals to the beliefs we value – and then use those groups to practice, and explore our beliefs, values, principles, attitudes and behaviours further. We organise through the social world as an exploration of our own cognitive existence. “Man’s progress requires specialization. But a division-of-labor society cannot survive without a rational philosophy—without a firm base of fundamental principles whose task is to train a human mind to be human, i.e., conceptual.” Rand (1984) The structure of consciousness according to an author in the theory of ‘Flow’ states depends upon the values we keep, and exploring, interacting with stimuli in the world, alternatively selecting interesting emergent information to integrate and store into categories; she continues - “In order for the self to meditate between these often conflicting instructions, the human organism had to develop another feature, an informational system that could differentiate among a great variety of stimuli, that could choose certain stimuli and focus selectively on them, and that could store and retrieve the information in a useable way.” – that by communicating with our peers we selectively

reinforce the boundaries between values, which as a result reinforces our sense of consciousness. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Csikszentmihalyi, I.(1992) “Social differential is itself genetically (i.e. Darwinian/Smithian in nature) based. Social insects are an-atomically differentiated to facilitate the performance of their specialized functional roles Wilson, E. (1975) Dominance – Submission hierarchies seem to be present in all socially living primates. Already during the first year of life, human infants placed in a playpen begin to show rudiments of social stratification, with the familiar Marxist (or capitalist) differention between those who control resources and those who do not. By six years of age quite stable and generally accepted rankings in “toughness” develop among boys Daniel G. Freedman (1979) Omark, Strayer,Freedman (1980) “The more complex the social system – the more statuses and roles it contains – the more markers of differential it will have to use.” Consciousness Evolves, over the course of centuries attention has competed and become more diverse as it innovates and specialises in differentiated stimuli – even though persons are no more intelligent and able to process more information than their ancestors did a million years ago; they have developed a way of condensing, summarizing and externalising information that would be impossible to process; their cumulative algorhithms have made the manipulation of information more complex than it has ever been. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Csikszentmihalyi, I.(1992:25) From our formation, participation and character that we play out in groups causes “particular situation specific sense of self concept behaviours, attitudes, to be activated (‘switched on’)

producing various self-images… as a function of an interaction between characteristics of the perceiver and the situation.” Henri Tajfel (2010) Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., et al (1987) “Man is an animal that makes bargains: no other animal does this - no dog exchanges bones with another.”Adam Smith(1776) According to social exchange theory – the theory that we bargain in our conversations for non-economical-utility - when we form relationships; whether it be a brief conversation with a stranger – or with aim to make someone our wife or boss; It should be viewed as a form of exchange and bargaining – where you are offering certain values and qualities into the mix, while they are offering others. In economics, when two people are exchanging goods it’s called – Comparative Advantage – that people specialize in a particular type of talent, in order to exchange value with others. In order to demonstrate this; suppose everyone in the world was equally as good as each other at everything – then why would you need a mechanic to fix your car, a builder to build your house etc. We build our relationships in order to make more than we spend - i.e. to become better people; funnier, more pretty, more intelligent and all the niche of qualities associated in those categories. If your offering represents enough value beyond the costs that it costs the other participant to interact with you – then the interaction will continue, and perhaps escalate further – but if not the relationship will quickly end or never begin in the first place – as relationships are the pursuit of joint benefit.

If an individual doesn’t believe they are gaining anything from an interaction; but are there when they know they could achieve higher utility elsewhere, then they are there against their will. Their participation is against what makes them most profitable and for this reason they feel a feeling of discomfort perhaps accompanied by the thought “I don’t want to do this”, “I don’t want to talk to this person”, “I want to quit this job”, “I can’t believe this guy is trying to have sex with me”. This is to say; that even the opportunity of other things other than the interaction someone is currently in are a cost and if the interaction the person is in, isn’t great enough to increase the mental-capability of a given value category (drive) that the purpose of the interaction is attempting to increase – then the interaction will end. The only exception to this is when people are forced against their will (i.e. will being their believed opportunities outside of the current circumstances). When you make eye contact with someone across a room, buy a coffee, dancing on a dance floor, you are signalling information like crazy; across many different categories of drives that other people are looking to acquire – When a place is full of different opportunities and threats, being signalled I will refer to this as ‘Noise’. We’ll quickly cover while signalling should be classified as noise – every time a piece of information is exposed to you, you automatically recall schemas – category blocks of information – associative memories relating to that precise topic – there’s multiple problems with this, it distracts you from what your priorities are i.e. what you’re looking to specialize in – while at the same time the information that your offered does not fit into the schematic mental boxes in your brain; that your connecting

ideas are not actually precisely what is being signalled – the mental reality is different from the signalled reality; there are huge conflicts in information from what you see, what you are trying to achieve and the like, and it causes a form of psychological distress – this distress that prevents you ‘hearing’ what you want to see communicated, or the attitudes/behaviours etc. that you want to engage in, will be referred to as noise – as it acts as a barrier. The problem with life is, the opportunities are amongst the threats, one man’s garbage is another man’s gold. Our aim is to acquire all of our partner’s assets while giving up none of our own. And the best players at this game; can be rated and ranked in different ways – this can be referred to as status or popularity; there are lots of different signals of status – money, being a wellrounded individual, popularity, adaptability. But for the sake of a measurement, we could say that the highest ranked individual is the one who receives the most attention amongst peers, that others look to that person for opportunities, and end up putting ‘more of themselves’ into the interaction because they so greatly require the value that the high-status person holds. Think of the crew, or posse that a high status celebrity has around them, or even if you look at the size of the social groups that a respectable DJ, or successful creative content producer might have surrounding them; they have a monopoly, and people are willing to pay the highest price ‘their personality’ in the pursuit of gaining some of the inspiration that the other person offers. In one study; they rated the status of an individual in the workplace based on “the number of colleagues who reported his name, when they were asked to recall who they lunched with in

the past” This provides an index of how in-demand all the individuals in the workplace where comparatively to one another. A person’s attraction to a group stimulates his desire to become a member, but only if he proves himself attractive to its other members can he realize this desire and gain social acceptance. Like groups, pairing, and individuals – every scenario is unique – groups form because of complementary values and goals – and unique abilities to achieve those goals. When you begin on a relationship exchange behaviour with others; they must unconsciously consider the following – “opportunity costs, investment costs, the actual loss of the material resource, or costs intrinsic to the behaviour itself; the opportunity costs of exchange refer to the “rewards forgone” from alternative partners or behaviours not chosen.” For example; consider the idea of going to a movie with a friend, rather than staying at home and reading a book – it might be that you value the intellectual knowledge that you will acquire from reading the book as a reward that will be just as valuable as maintaining the relationship with your friend. In this example the financial cost of watching the film, and the hours lost could be valued as equal to the effort to hold your attention to read a book along with the hours lost reading the book would take. When considering costs, not only is there opportunity cost, investment etc. but one must consider the psychological costs – for example the fatigue associated with using excessive attention & concentration, the unpleasantness of sitting in the same position for hours on end etc.

We briefly mentioned game theory earlier on in the book. This is the theory - that people mathematically calculate the value of the exchanges they are participating in. It’s a fundamental principle in mathematics and economics to explain the actions of large businesses, and individuals; when participating in a two or more person game, where if they work together they will achieve greater benefits than they would if they separately pursued their own selfish desires. “Evolution has programmed into our mental software sophisticated, intuitive …mathematic… “Non-zero-sum game finders” Beinhocker,. E. (2010:269) We cannot survive, without others – this is a fundamental fact of life. We need good services, companionship, approval, status, information and a whole plethora of things we cannot cover individually in this text, we depend on each other for resources, and we acquire these through trading and exchange. In a scene in the 2001 film a beautiful mind “several male colleagues are discussing a group of women at a bar. There is a blonde woman and several brunettes. The men agree that the blonde is the most desirable, but that any one of the brunettes is better than no woman at all. First, suppose that all the men devote their full attention to the blonde. His exact words in the film are”If everyone competes for the blond, we block each other and no one gets her. So then we all go for her friends. But they give us the cold shoulder, because no one likes to be second choice. Again, no winner. But what if none of us go for the blond. We don’t get in each other’s way, we don’t insult the other girls. That’s the only way we win. That’s the only way we all get [a girl.]”

As you can see, because they originally were all planning on pursuing the blonde – its likely that each other would merely get in the way of each other’s attempt to gain her interest – and she would feel only slightly interested in any one of them (assuming her interest is equally divided) thereby neutralizing the efforts of the men – causing none of them to be successful with her. “Instead, Nash suggests that the men ought to ignore the blonde and each should concentrate on a (different) brunette.” As that way they are simultaneously doing what’s best for the group – and the best for themselves. (from A Beautiful Mind: The Shooting Script, Akiva Goldsman, 2002)

Group

Formation,

Group

Structure,

Competition and Psychological Noise All social relations; whether between love ones, or strangers – involve power; where one person has dominance, and the other doesn’t, where you are constantly negotiating resources to get more of what you want, without diminishing the others abilities to carry on providing you with those resources. While at the same time allowing they are trying to increase their own utility achievement by attempting to diminish your resources, while at the same time only diminishing them to the maximum point where they can still carry on the relationship with you. I.e. you’re still alive and functioning in the way they would hope and expect. Many reading this; might think of it as shame to describe human life in such selfish terms; however; we’ve spent a great deal of time in this text describing that selfish games don’t pay, that in order to consider the wider effect of your utility seeking actions – requires looking at the way others will act in response to your

moves – also its undoubtable that we want to look after and care for others for somewhat purely altruistic reasons, because we believe they are beautiful, precious, cute, we’re in love with them etc. However it must be said that a diamond is also very beautiful; but we would say that someone who wishes to own a big diamond is selfish, so why would we not use the same language to describe wanting to be in love? The truth is; people don’t just represent one value or quality, they’ve spent their life amongst constant random occurrences, and have a plethora of experiences that cannot be put into words; they’ve compensated all their virtues and vices and found a kind of equilibrium that allows their existence to continue functioning – when we value someone we don’t just judge them on one quality but on the entire behavioural & cognitive system of the person; and perhaps even account for their external assets (friendship group, financial situation, mobility etc.) For the purpose of simplistic in this section we will look at the game-theory playoff when two people battle it out to swap value in a very few categories i.e. creative input, beauty, popularity. We appreciate that these aren’t the most fascinating human traits; but these are ones that are relatively easy to understand, and can be found in every facet of human life. We all have our own personal standards, customs, beliefs about all kind of social etiquette, eating habits, the structure of conversation, what one does on a typical day, how many hours of sleep are acceptable, how much intellectual work per day, how much entertainment per day, the structure of friendship formation; and we indirectly or directly impose our sense of morality onto others we meet; whether they like it or not.

The people, who are willing to accept your rules and customs, do so because they have little other choice, the opportunity you present for them seems so big that the pill they take is bittersweet – it’s worth it. You might happily marry someone beautiful even though she is an air-head, and not consider her lack of intelligence to be an issue in the marriage. Someone else might be completely discontent with a partner unless they also work in the same field of employment; as the benefits of sharing work-related knowledge & experience on a day to day basis can lead to further career development. People will act out to the best of their advantage when dealing with others, and they will do so always with limited understanding of what the actions-thoughts of the other is likely to be; they guess based on their previous experience acting with similar people or experience with that person. When two people meet; if one controls a value in a category that the other seeks; then you could say the value holder has a high demand for their product, and if no one else can provide it; then the supply is limited, and the value holder has a monopoly – this makes the resource very expensive to acquire for the buyer, and very profitable for the supplier, people do what’s in their best interest. Interactions go through different stages of monopoly; sometimes you might be an extremely intelligent developed individual in one particular specialism of conversation or interaction, but completely lacking in another field, so the interaction will swing between one holding the power, then to the other person holding the power; where each person in the exchange is gaining some form of benefit through the exchange.

However; this sharing isn’t really as profitable as we will hope, both of you win; but in this book we want to achieve specific goals with people, as a hypnotist when I have someone recall all the associations for a set of ideas I want portrayed in a targets mind I need their absolute concentration and dedication to this; no jokes no playing around, I don’t want them to walk away, and I need them to precisely understand what I mean, without altering the idea themselves. When I tell them what I want them to experience, I don’t want them taking that value on board and comparing it with another perspective that they have from their own life, comparing the idea I present with another counter idea, or different version of the idea I offer – because this psychological noise will mean that the idea I offer isn’t fully represented, its crowded with other unpredicted associations; and the person has a very real sense that they are choosing their ideas. In order to gain the absolute attention of someone, I require a monopoly, that I’m in demand at that moment, the person is fascinated by my presence, and listening, without thinking about the next thing they are going to say, where their friends are, are how pretty their hair looks in case other boys are watching them. How do we get to this point? In economics someone is said to have a comparative advantage if they can produce a resource at a lower cost than anyone else who they trade with. For example Portugal (where I’m currently writing this sentence from) is very good at producing wine and Olive Oil – it might cost them 10,000 men a year and 10,000 square miles of land to produce these resources – whereas Spain might be very good at producing cloth, costing them 20,000 men and 20,000 square miles to achieve the amount of output to buy the wine and oils

offered by Portugal – Because Portugal is better at producing these resources then Spain, and vice versa with regards to Cloth then rather than each attempting to produce all of their own resources; they may aswell trade, saving time, space and valuable resources such as land and man power. Ricardo, D. (1817) When every guy in the club desires an attractive girl, then she has a monopoly in that field – but to view her as having a monopoly is simply untrue, she only has a monopoly if you’re a buyer into that particular value. But the moment you say to a girl “What are you looking for?” or “What’s your interests?” then suddenly you find that she isn’t looking to specialize in the field she’s already an avid player in i.e. “looking great” she wants to get out into something more interesting, now suddenly she can’t demand a monopolist price for her services ‘looking great’ – she now feels an inadequate player in the field she desires. “We want what we don’t have” – Quote from unknown thinker. “The problem with people is that they always want more” Quote from drug-forum.com Doctors need to control drugs that are highly addictive, or that can easily kill people who abuse them, because people are naturally prone to increasing their level of risk quickly – whatever they start doing, quickly becomes ‘never enough’. When you’re bargaining with people; they have anchors for where they see the price at – considering the information they known based on the probabilities they expect. Sure it’s true that the girl who is attractive in the club might have control over the

majority of guys there, and therefore can be viewed popular and high status; but her utility seeking lies somewhere else entirely. I have a very good friend, who when he goes into a business meeting he briefly mentions that recently Mariah Carey charged 1.4million night for a show – apparently upon saying this people say “no I don’t believe it” Which personally I think is amazing how people have such an instant opinion on it. Anyway, he mentions that he believes when he says it that he ends up getting paid more from the negotiation than he would have expected to make without mentioning the phrase. People cannot help themselves but consider external information – psychological noise; and they end up using this noise as a reference that gives insight to their thoughts – assuming the thing seems related, and presented roughly within the same time period. I used to have a girlfriend who didn’t think much of hypnosis, despite her seeing me hypnotize hundreds of people (mainly girls) the girlfriend said to me “they only do what you want because your good looking” at the time I disagreed, what she was saying sounded to me like she was saying “They are just acting, ‘pretending to be hypnotized’ to make you happy’” which seemed like an insult to my character and experience as I had been a hypnotist for numerous years before meeting her, what she was saying seemed to discount my worth. I thought about this for a few months, we discussed it at great length, until we came to the mutual agreement that she was correct. Me being good looking makes me a good hypnotist; Let me explain why – firstly often when I’m looking my best people are very open to talk to me, in fact if I peacock i.e. dress to be seen, look good, and smile although its deemed economically

impossible as the environment is a perfectly competitive environment, I aim approached. I was born lucky in this particular specialism. Earlier on in the book when I mentioned another trainer called Mystery; the first thing he said to me was “you’re too good looking, that can be a problem”. My ex was right because there is no clear distinction between conscious and unconscious, it doesn’t matter why people do what you want them to do, the fact is they either do it, or they don’t. People think your fascinating for kinds of reasons, but the best people at this use a range of techniques that we shall cover later in this section; the important thing to hold on to is that you have unique advantages; you don’t need to be anything like me – and anything you’re not in life, can be changed providing your willing to put a great deal of investment into it – probably a lot more than you expected to invest – but none the less you can have at least some of what you want. A domain class – is a class of outcomes (desires) that are functionally similar in the sense that when you interact with someone with that quality you at least indirectly gain some of the value in that domain class that they are a member of – Everything in life is diminishing in return, in marginal utility. That if you desire sugar for glucose in the brain for either mental energy or physical energy – then one coffee might be the perfect antidote, you really wanted that coffee and would have happily spent $5 to purchase it, how much would you pay for a second coffee immediately after – is relative. It depends is the answer – how much did you need a coffee in the first place, how much energy are you spending, will glucose

alone be sufficient? and all of this assumed the coffee place had some form of monopoly – that you couldn’t have gone somewhere else for a cheaper coffee. Similarly “If you desire to spend time with a friend, a single friend might fulfil your need for companionship (I’m not sure the deeper reasons for companionship, perhaps language formation, practicing recall of schemata, remembering and restructuring information into summarized stories?) The problem lies, if you have two friends, and you’ve already spent time with one, then you perhaps have already achieved your goal of companionship; and now have no desire to see the second friend, even though no friend (in this case) is comparably more useful in any other field than the companionship function described. However suppose “If one friend is a hiking companion and the other a close confidante, then the two friendships may be in different domains, and time spent with one friend will have no effect on the value of the other's companionship.” Perhaps we could take the example of a job interview – if you go into a job interview and you give them what they are already achieving in marginally diminishing utility – i.e. “you know I think the first candidate we interviewed was the best” because the first candidate solved the desired problem “we need someone to perform X function” but comparably when hundreds of applicants seem to be able to perform X function then it makes the performance of the function seem less impressive and valuable – when dealing with someone with high status – who is in demand then by being the same as everyone else you are competing with everyone else – and will likely lose.

If you’re in a bar or nightclub and are looking to join a social group, i.e. you’re a stranger and your just saying “hi” then you need to be sure your signally something that the group doesn’t have but while at the same time signally that you have qualities that make you fit into the generalized label or category of what the group is aiming to achieve. Not only that but you need to connect with the individual players one-to-one as well as the group. “As it is useful that while mankind are imperfect there should be different opinions, so is it that there should be different experiments of living; that free scope should be given to varieties of character, short of (providing there is no) injury to others; and that the worth of different models of life should be proved practically, when any one of thinks fit to try them. Mill, S (2005) Remember to put in the idea about; using therapeutic analysis to find out the core of someone’s personality; then using these functions to build value, structure and support. Our life choices are adaptive, they can be changed. It is for this reason that psychotherapists & counsellors exist. We build the world around ourselves using the opportunities we have, to spontaneously cue and trigger the thoughts & attitudes and lifestyle we create. Through meaningful conversation we are prompted to recall past information, or to anticipate what we want to gain or avoid in the future – we use others, and things we find in the environment to bring to mind ideas of decisions to make, and store memories (schemata) in objects, things, scenarios, people around us – we tell ourselves “when I see this person I will remember to tell them about” this gives us a chronological track over our life, our decisions, a sense of continuity – providing us

with greater ease to make decisions and chose the path of highest utility by being able to easily consider all the relevant facts – to anticipate the probability about ‘what is the right thing to do?’ The idea of Freudian transference & projection is when you speak to a person, you are speaking to people they remind you of, and this process can be used to have discussions with people in your life – who might for whatever reason no longer exist in your field of communication. It’s a safe way of discussing issues that might be anxiety provoking if speaking with the person the communication is meant for. As a therapist; you are a foundation that allows a stranger to schematically explore themselves, you can have people explore deep interpersonal feelings about life, rather than chronological information (which lacks huge amounts of unique perspective) – by learning to get to know people – but strategically – for the purpose of having them explore their esoteric feelings rather than just their life details – can be an extremely powerful tool in having people feel that you know about them. Life is confusing – and underneath our calm; - It’s ok! Complexion, is a kind of poetry that is crying out for help – its dreams are dying – and it needs partnership in order to better prevent disaster; most of us our so detached from our problems, by not thinking about them for so long; that we can’t even envisage what we want. We like to think that our mind is one solid unit – of lots of beliefs that all connect – that make perfect logical sense, to believe that our brain is always in consensus.

However the reality is that our brain is usually pretty much in one big argument –that every time we try to make even the smallest decision “What drink should I have?” there is arguing between the little components the little beliefs. – “What price?”, “What’s the quality like?”, “Which is the best value for money”, “Which is made in the largest glass?” “Which cocktail has the most fruit?”, “Does that count towards my five fruit and vegetables a day?” “There's something unsettling about seeing the brain as one big argument. We like to believe that our decisions reflect a clear cortical consensus that the entire mind agrees on what we should do. And yet, that serene self-image has little basis in reality” Jonah Lehrer (2010:204). The light of their wants and ambitions might come to rise itself; and from this the person can feel some form of dependency on you; as they don’t know how to solve their deep search for meaning in the world – as they feel they cannot achieve it because despite their specialisms in the fields they’ve become successful in – they feel they are inadequately meeting their core unique self. It always struck me how easy people find it to explore this side to their personality with a therapist – or a strange guy in a night club, but how difficult they seem to find it amongst the noise of day to day living. – Amongst all the noise – while with another person one can find a kind of peace with themselves. Have you ever had that feeling – where you’re truly powerful? That your energy is solid and contained in your mental life – that your attention is exact and precise – and instead of being at your desk writing – your perfectly awake and in a nightclub/bar? Maybe you have? – Well its incredible – everyone is running

around with so much noise; they can’t concentrate on anything; not even their own thoughts; and in a half intelligent conversation they can’t handle it – when you feel like this – people are completely attracted to you; you seem like the coolest person ever – so contained. Learning to get to know people; while you’re the calm centre of the world – giving someone your absolute full attention; hopefully should cause them to give you their full attention in return. But remember, don’t bid on the qualities they don’t see as valuable – discover what will make them know they are truly alive, and then use that – be that soul, that spirit that they are looking for; and hold them – although only briefly else they become accustomed to it. Amongst the mess, you look like “just another guy” don’t compete, just win! There is a frustrating paradox of social function – if you attempt to join a group and your too good; then you will be seen to be competing for leadership; and for this reason the leader may attempt to prevent you from entering the group; and if you don’t take their request seriously –they may see this as a direct threat on their livihood and do dirty tactics – this sounds like the stuff of a nature program ‘the lion and its territory’ or a Sci-Fi movie. But don’t be surprised if you start stepping on someone’s turf being the ‘most well rounded charming guy in the world’ that you end up with a knife in your back or being attacked by 20 guys while you’re walking home – this isn’t the stuff of fantasy, its life. Just recently I was with a friend, and I had been in ‘work mode’ for a couple of weeks, so I didn’t seem like the most interesting of fellows to talk to in the club. Anyway, this friend I trust with

the world. I spoke to a girl and I went into ‘hero mode’ and he made it very clear that he had decided that I shouldn’t be alive by the morning. Of course like anyone I was concerned by this, and being as I didn’t care that much for the girl I decided to drop my confidence just to ‘fit in’ – I had no intention of winning, if I did it would be much more sophisticated than just talking about my personal history and my ambitions – I would use the desires of the target, and then match those desires into pathways of success for the individual. Building structure, and meaning to a hypothetical future relationship together. I purposely don’t do that, because I have no desire for such a future. It of course is true that not every time you enter a social group with confidence that they are going to attempt to kill you. But they might be disinterested in the things you say, in your presence as a form of defensive strategy to protect their own position in the group etc. you cannot work with a reluctant individual who is preoccupied by other concerns – you can’t have them do anything. When you enter a social group – usually you’ve got to be pretty low key – mere expose your way into the group; sly like a snake, as not to constitute a competitive threat to the structure or nature of the group. When group members seek to impress each other with their attractiveness, they enter into a form of indirect competition with one another. The common way to prevent this is ‘self-depreciation’ putting yourself down, gentle jokes about yourself, making jokes about your history, talent or skills. And also not seeming to compete

for leadership when others reinforce their own authority by demonstrating their specialist traits; another way that you might be tested, is they may redefine the purpose of their group; they might mention “music” and see whether you pick up on the fact they like music and then accurately continue to expand upon the music you like – matching to their taste; music is just an obvious example of a category that people us to define themselves, but there lots of ways people might reinforce the character of the group upon your entry, by mentioning a label “Hah, that’s so crazy!” indicating that craziness is a purpose of the group. "New acquaintances tend to search in their conversations for clues that indicate some shared experiences or characteristics having fought in the war in Europe, coming from the same state - and they facilitate one another’s search by relating incidents that reveal their background or opinions “ Most conversations with strangers are built on ‘mere hints’ that are dropped that indicate someone’s personal brand, or unique competitive advantages, to which they expect you to explore, and help in the priming of associative beliefs in their schemata network; thereby reducing the glucose-hormone cost of them guiding, recalling, contrasting complex networks of thoughts themselves – you make it easier for them, and help them guide through a kind of trip. An individual might mention someone, then the other individual might add value to it, which causes the initial individual to have some related ideas to the initial thereby creating further value to the original thought – by adding some form of innovation – causing a kind of evolution of ideas at a much lower cost than would have been achieved by the person attempting to explore their own thoughts – a task that most

people find near impossible due to lack of concentration capabilities. If player 2 fails to pick up the value of the initial hint, i.e. they didn’t mention anything related to the concept, it implies that player 2 knows nothing about the subject; as a schema of information wasn’t spontaneously activated upon the mention of the topic specialism. In this circumstance assuming player 1 has the patience, another hint will be dropped, wrapped up into the structure of the communication this signal will be offered hopefully triggering something in common to communicate about. “Individuals who share attitudes and values provide one another with social support for their opinions, which makes their association attractive, particularly if minor variations in their orientations, contribute a challenge to their discussion of the issue." Blau, P. (1964) The important issue here is the need for our ideas to be challenged, to provide further discussion, insight, to develop further competences, and allow the ease and continuation of recall for the topic area; through rehearsal and practice – in order to have our ideas challenged we need an adequate opponent, unfortunately most people we meet are incapable at providing this service. You the reader of this book are going to be an exception. For us to succeed in our lives, we need to differentiate, to use our unique capabilities, our insight into things in different ways as our advantage that gives us an absolute monopoly against our competitors in that arena. For example “ the fact that a person is an American and that he is opposed to communism; hardly makes him a particularly attractive associate in this country,

since attributes or values shared by virtually everyone do not differentiate anyone." Blau, P. (1964:39) The insight gained from that discussion won’t add anything. The time and energy spent discussing with this individual will represent a cost, not a gain… assuming that their wasn’t another purpose for the discussion, that it was a lead into a more interesting topic area where the individual in question has value you wish to acquire – that the communism discussion was just ‘small talk’ before you got onto more important matters. The reason we don’t usually hold strong viewpoints – although we nearly all recognize that those with strong viewpoints (distinct opinions) are usually seen to be attractive individuals – is we recognize our own fear of antagonizing others and being rejected by them for having such a distinctive trait. For this reason usually when we meet people we reduce ourselves to subtle hints about our inner uniqueness, our distinctive competencies. The unfortunate thing is throughout our lives, the lack of expressing ourselves, developing our opinions causes them to rot and die – until there is nothing distinctive left about us, we become as lifeless as everyone else. When aligning yourself with a social group - an individual drops hints and clues to assess commonality; and doesn't real about their inner core; they check whether you would understand. When joining a social group, in addition to the high confidence ‘hero position’ – which can be seen as a threat to leadership or an attempt to dominant another into submission, there is the selfdepreciating strategy – which if you follow you might be deemed too much of a cost for the group and rejected, you might try to niche and differentiate yourself by developing specialism

in one topic area and then purposely self-depreciate yourself in other aspects of life to gain acceptance. Another strategy as a newcomer when attempting to join an established group might be to flatter their hosts, it should always be noted though that because the insecure newcomer is entering an established group they will have to constrain their personality to fit in – because if they expose themselves they may be judged as different or completive and rejected. However if they are so indifferent and lack distinction they will be rejected, as the group will likely be fully formed and confident in their outward expression – and by contrast you as the newcomer seem lifeless.

STATUS: Charm, wit, self-depreciation, and one-upmanship “To be impressive enough for people to cling to your presence, you must infer which of your qualities would do well in a given group, and adapt your conduct accordingly” Blau, P. (1964) Remember the games you played as a kid? I do it - was incredible; the sophistication involved at anticipating what other players in the game are doing to try to outsmart you and win the game. When I was young my friends and I, would spend weeks just sitting in a large field devising the coolest games possible; the ones that would spark the most competitive and insightful thought as you try to predict the moves of others. I’ve had this feeling of an adult of adult life been a bit dull – that everyone you meet isn’t quite as impressive as you would hope….

However; not all of adult life is completely absent of game like behaviour; just think back to the last time you played a game – maybe it was like a board game such as RISK, Chess, Connect 4. Or card games – like Texas Hold Em’ Up poker – when playing such games you learn to anticipate the actions of other players and develop more sophisticated strategies after you learn the behaviour and predict the ambitions of the other players. You also make the assumption that the other players are using the best of their cognitive abilities to try to work you out in return – as you alter your strategy to take this into account. Wow; that’s something closer to what life is supposed to be about right? But even that is child’s play; kids can do it. Why do we as adults reduce ourselves to keeping our personality so tied down that we suddenly aren’t allowed to play games with people we meet, do we avoid playing games for risk of losing and being a sore loser – or not to offend another player when we display our intellect and defeat them in a kids game – I guess we must. You might think that it’s just children’s games that display this lack of intellect, planning and strategy for – that perhaps when it comes to our work or social lives that we are more strategic? It’s surprising that we can put some time and effort into mastering a game or a skill defeating their opponents when it’s in the context of a game – for example in the computer game – call of duty on the PlayStation 3 - But when it comes to more important matters like building a relationship with a stranger, or meeting someone for the purpose of hearing about job opportunities or building sexual attraction; that we seem to act in the absence of any reason or logic what so ever.

In conversation, people regularly reveal their intentions, admit priceless information, state what they think about others, without carefully considering the consequences of what they are doing. Goffman, E. (1961:26) In different groups we are required to be different people- In one group it might be important to be athletic, in another artistic talent; The requirement for impressive – changes from group to group, venue to venue, street to street, night to night. If you’re going to reap the benefits of multiple social circles – find the job opportunities, find the creative people etc. you’re going to have to be good at inferring what peoples intentions are, and offering them some value in return – your multiple experiences from the many social groups might allow you some benefits as you share unlikely information and experiences between them – creating value through innovation. Every field in life has ways of indicating who is of the highest status; in this section we are going to focus on how not to look like a ‘jack of all trades’ as we switch between multiple social groups – but instead look like a ‘well rounded man of the world’, someone charming and sophisticated – we need to communicate status by outsmarting our peers, while at the same time building rapport and using flattery in order to dispel their competitive concerns. This section we focus on becoming a Gentleman. How is status communicated? – Goffman – a social exchange theorist solved this problem with his theory of role distance. He outlines a general format for impressing others. In short you complete a specialism your component believes they have acquired mastery within while performing another more complex task, in order to mock them, but while flattering,

charming, and sharing common experiences & understanding with them. This is an elegant solution to the previously outlined problem of whether to be too confident, or too self-depreciating when joining a group. As with this solution; you neither offend nor do you decline yourself from being elected for the position of leadership. For example; consider the problem of children learning how to use a merry go round – the young children around the age of two finds the movement of the merry go round too threatening and cries until taken off. While a child at four can master the challenge, they are fully absorbed into the task and take it seriously. However school age children, are no longer intent on riding the merry go round – but instead fool around on it, they swing, hang upside down, jump off and on while it spins. They do this not only because they no longer find the experience of riding the merry go round a challenge or rewarding; and therefore make the task more complex in order to gain enjoyment and to show to themselves and others that the merry go round poses no meaningful challenge. By riding the merry go round in this flamboyant fashion shows both psychological distance, and distance in status from the previous ‘baby’ role of their former self and the other riders of the merry go round. Blau, P. (1964:40) It is not just kids who use this kind of ‘mind reading’ where they assess each other’s computational abilities in order to assess who is more dominant, who is worthy of leadership by their sheer ability to out-compute the other candidates for election. It’s an unwritten rule in all social exchanges – that we all sign up too;

when we see someone who seems tense and deeply involved in a task we automatically recognize that this shows the limits of the individuals computational abilities are being reached. Blau, P. (1964) I’ve spent a great deal of time with magicians, with a venue they don’t know the social dynamics of, they walk in cautious and conservative. If they don’t see a ‘social in’ to break into a social group to perform to them and win them over – then assuming the magician is not being paid for this, he will leave complaining that the venue is not for him. However; when he has won over a small audience, convincing them that he is good at magic, because he is really intelligent, because his ‘hands are quicker than your eye’ or ‘because he can distract and control your attention’ then you begin to be won over by the lies and hold that this person really his someone of status – you assume that just because he has a comparative advantage as a magician, that he must be superior in all fields – and at that moment, he is powerful and has a monopoly over you. This is about the time that you hear the magician’s ego, their charisma comes out, and they will start telling jokes that imply they are clever, sometimes making jokes & banter about their audience. And will approach the riskier more competitive social groups now that they have the security of being able to turn back towards their loyal supporters if rejected. At this point their charisma their ego, might be enough to allow them into these more difficult social groups; because they communicate that they are winners, and can back it up by a single example of specialism.

In all fields, these kind of flamboyances seem to come out in order to be able to exert influence of large groups of people; for example “an important surgeon will often joke during an operation to show skill and superiority over the other doctors, to show that the task isn’t taxing or difficult for him. This shows he can perform the fairly difficult tasks with ease; giving confidence to himself, showing status to the group etc. There was a series of television adverts in the UK showing the dangers of alcohol – in short friends would jump around comparing their abilities to do things like jump over walls or talk to girls, until finally one of them climbs up some scaffolding on the side of a building, falls off and dies. To continue the example of the magician or mind reader – consider the circus artist, for example, “who strains every muscle and nearly fails before he finally succeeds arouses great awe in his audience, but the one who performs his difficult act with ease, as if it were mere child’s play for him, also commands profound admiration.” Blau, P. (1964:41) Whether it demonstrates higher status to make a task look difficult, or whether to perform a complex task while looking like you don’t have a care in the world – depends on what type of performance is occurring; for example in the case of mindreading – being a mentalist – the audience doesn’t realize it could be hard to read people’s minds, they have no method of assessing the difficulty, so to drag the performance out and make it seem more of a struggle makes it more dramatic – the manifestation of tense concentration and strain increases the audiences admiration. Whereas in hypnotism the opposite is true, because the audience realize the difficulty in having others do what we want, being a

master of it i.e. doing it quickly, and proficiently while seeming without a care in the world – makes it seem even the more impressive – you believe you are witnessing a master. Since Las Vegas March 2011 I’ve been regularly performing hypnosis blindfolded – to which I was the first documented hypnotist to do this, and being passed a subject to be hypnotised as selected by the audience, who I have no idea what they look like, what they are doing, or what they are thinking – I receive no input of such things through my visual field. I’ve had criticisms from other hypnotists, that it doesn’t prove anything, hypnosis mainly uses your communication, and not seeing the participant shouldn’t make a difference and therefore isn’t any more impressive, instead it’s just silly. The truth is, as a trainer of other hypnotists, I have a responsibility to communicate status, and command respect. And in order to do this requires an instantly recognizable way to a large audience as to why I’m proficient within this field. “The world is not enough” – is a phrase that the fictitious character British Secret Agent; James Bond has wrote on his families coat of arms. The phrase derives from a Latin meaning; but few are sure of its meaning – It’s suspected to mean “we have the ability to change our future”, “but it will never be enough, we always want more” Out with the old, and in with the new. People need to be challenged, to experience a sense of risk. Once you’ve had a small bet at gambling, often many people end up finding themselves spend their life savings, some spokespersons say that the drug “Cannabis” is a gateway drug, that you take that and that’s it, you’re on the slippery slope down through class B’s,

class A’s – and when you run out of money through the expensive Class A’s you’ll be on the heroin, and the crack cocaine. Although these are phrases often touted by freaking squares they are not completely wrong; life is a slippery slope – we need differentiation, innovation, insight leads to foresight. Any activity, be it a game, a sport, ones work – requires constant progression, challenge; we want to see that we are becoming closer to self-actualisation – a full realizing of our potential. Everything contains a risk; we cannot predict the future, and we are competing against a vast number of people – we need to work at the very brink of our probable limits, to achieve the most from the potential opportunities we think are coming. Whether this means driving at 120mph down the motorway and having no idea what’s coming over the horizon – to feel as if we can do our best at an unpredictable future, fly down a mountain on a set of ski’s, or attempt to outdo the casino on a roulette wheel – it seems that we don’t even care if the future is completely impossible to predict. We want the most amount of utility we can get, and we want it now! What makes these things exciting is the threat of failure, the size of the potential success – But we don’t like things to be too dangerous; We might choose a mountain side while skiing that is steeper than we would usually like – but we would not like one that contains a huge ravine that we might potentially have to jump in an emergency – because the stakes are just too high; a challenging stimulating activity can quickly turn into an unpleasant threat. We naturally admire people who take risks, because the motion of progressing towards opportunity while facing great adversity;

shows qualities, that we would like to develop for ourselves in our own lives. A well rounded-man; the charming spy – is bold, challenging, confrontational, but while never being insulting; his competitiveness can never be truly seen as an attack because he treats you with respect, flattering your character, understanding your concerns, while helping you explore the innards of your psyche; beliefs, finding flaws in your debating skills providing you with greater innovation to your thought; and for this you humbly surrender. A social group will pretty much always accept someone of this nature; because he is sufficiently challenging; even if he doesn’t provide any meaningful innovation he will provide some interesting discussion and perspective. But the ideas presented must only reflect slight disarrangements from the initial concept of interest to the group; if the ideas presented detracted too much then they might not seem connected and the people in the group will feel as if they have no rapport with the speaker, and we label him and outsider. Having an interesting partner who takes your ideas, and feeds them back to you with a smirk; with input you couldn’t possibly of thought of before – animates your spirit, and makes the social intercourse something of a sport – it becomes soulful and exciting. For the next few pages we are going to focus on why delivering respect – is not the best strategy when attempting to form relationships with strangers. There are various complexities associated with the power discrepancies that signals of respect creates; this can be “conceptualized as a series of interlocking, mixed games (mixed strategy), in which group members have some common and conflicting interests. “ (Peter Michael Blau: exchange & power)

Most of the groups we approach in social life; have at least two other players in them. If we impress only one member of the group (B) then for every increase in respect attained from (B) the more displeasure is caused to (C) who experiences a cost as the companionship desire in (B) is being spent – thereby destroying (C)’s ability to bargain and exchange with (B) temporarily. Therefore when we interact with groups; we usually recommend to talk to all players; and flattery, and charm each player individually at least for a time being – this way all group members simultaneously play the roles of exchange, and no member loses. However, every individual member can easily act unimpressed by your attempts to integrate yourself into the group; thereby withholding your respect, and your offer for the position of leadership – because they realize that if you have everyone in the group on your side; even though it seems all nice polite and casual and respectful – that this would give you a competitive advantage over the group – thereby allowing you to dictate your rules (to impose costs on the group) once you obtain leadership. You will rarely get an entire group on your side; your chances of “winning unilateral respect” are dictated by mathematical game theory. If each individual both you and the player in the group “Choses the strategy that allows him to withhold expressions of respect” then you both end up with the least preferential choice – no relationship. However If both you and the other express respect for each other; the peer relationship becomes established. During an the beginnings of an interaction with a group of two or more people – the group members may regularly look at one another as to determine each other’s strategy; because if one refuses to offer A respect; and the other one does; then the

ranking of the group would be; the refusal of respect would be the leader; and you would subordinates with the other player who offered you respect. However this ultimately would lead to a democratic problem – because now you A would have an equal power relationship with this player – and you two could potentially overthrow the leader. Therefore it’s important that groups act as a team, and try to anticipate each other’s decisions by reading each other’s signals when a stranger attempts to interact with the group. The worst case scenario for you; is that both of the players in the group are extremely socially savvy; and realize that providing they work as a team using their communication, signally, and exchange opportunities they could easily make you an externalsub member of their social group; and use this to acquire any value you hold – which they can then use in order to propel themselves utility wise into a group that has higher entry costs. Girls in clubs can be extremely good at this; for example; think of a scenario where you are talking to two very beautiful girls; who seem polite and nice to you; but seem busy as if they could have to leave at any moment – that they need good reason to stay, they are thirsty and need a drink and are going to go back to their male friends as they have a bottle of vodka; a group which will surely not accept you – by their clever teamwork they’ve managed to have you buy them a drink – however the opportunity cost for them if they were drinking merely a cheap cocktail vs. the expensive vodka means your mathematically required to buy them the vodka in order to continue the relationship – however the smartest bit about the story; is that the whole thing was fabricated – there really was no ‘guy friends

with the vodka’ – but now that they have more power they could use this to bargain membership of such a group. Hopefully this makes it clear how to integrate yourself with a group and work your way towards the position of leadership – we will cover further on in this section ways of using charm and flattery in order to avoid delivering direct respect as to avoid becoming a subordinate of the group. “Group members do not decide on strategies a priori without any knowledge of the strategies of overs, but they are in continual interaction and recurrently modify their behaviour in response to the preceding actions of other members” Blau, P. (1964) In British folklore; the upper classes in the 1700’s – 1970’s were believed to be particularly challenging, debatable opponents in ordinary looking conversation – where they for fun would pick apart your story; while displaying status and poise. Stephen Potter; a 1950’s writer and BBC presenter dubbed this kind of behaviour with the term ‘one-upmanship’ (Potter, S. :1997) which he defined as the practice of successfully outdoing a competitor; treating social intercourse as a kind of sport; that in British conversations you’re a kind of gamester, a man about the world; that if you’re not outsmarting your opponent, your being outsmarted. It’s a generalisation to say that all upper class people were like this; but, there’s some truth that when your regularly finding yourself in encounters were you typically outrank those around you in ways addition to class – intellect, wit, dress sense, manners, etc. and the people your typically surrounded by don’t like you i.e. your employees in the workhouse. Etc.

Then it becomes practical to be arrogant; “sticking to your face regardless of whether the encounter you’re in supports it… however, those surrounding this gentleman may highly value his opinion; and if he witnesses them being discomforted by his comments.. then he may detract them, becoming embarrassed and apologizing”. Some people you meet are extremely arrogant; they seem to say whatever pops into their ego regardless of the discomfort and expense of those around them – this could be because of drug abuse, alcohol abuse, stressed personality type, or some other cause, their lack of awareness to consider, or understand the signals that others use to portray their discomfort, due to their intense inability to focus on the broader picture other than their life concerns makes it impossible to notice when they are being arrogant. These extremely arrogant people without the ability to feel empathy for others – might be seen to be strong leadership material – believed to possess ‘a well-rounded-challenging” charming character that we outlined – however the audience in this case is mistaken. A real man judges his target audience, assesses his message, and purposely outdoes them while keeping them smiling throughout. "Modesty is due to a fear of incurring the well-merited envy and contempt which pursues those who are intoxicated by good fortune: It is a useless display of strength of mind; and the modesty of those who attain the highest eminence is due to a desire to appear even greater than their position" Rochefoucauld, F. (1963) Before you enter a conversation, if you are going to play this character of the ‘worldly-charmer’ you need to be ready to have

you wit-level turned up to the max. The slightest mistake could be taken to be a sign of weakness - even if you are the only one who notices, it might mean that you feel embarrassed and want to retract your statements. When you make a slight mistake in an interaction where you are supposed to be the worldly-wise Gentleman, you and others may become embarrassed; not because of the size of the blunder – but instead because for a moment no one knows whether to laugh or to wait for the train of thought to be re-established; this surprise might make people look away, or laugh; and if the charmer takes offense to this, then people will pick up on this and the Gentleman’s will fall from his throne. [SCRIPT - From the movie 'THE TOURIST'] Elise: Invite me to dinner, Frank? Frank Taylor: What? Elise: [gives him a look] Frank Taylor: Would you like to have dinner? Elise: Women don't like questions. Frank Taylor: Join me for dinner. Elise: Too demanding. Frank Taylor: Join me for dinner? Elise: Another question. Frank Taylor: [thinks for a moment] I'm having dinner, if you'd care to join me. Elise: [smiles at him] [/script] To show you how the game behaviour we’ve outlined in morally sound; and not the same as being a dominant bully we shall describe the behaviour of a bully – to insult others, have jokes at their expense, to drive others out of the situation, and from the group. Fact is if you did this, the person your being rude to would likely just back down, disappear from the group, and group would likely not say anything; at worst they’ll just become despondent; it’s unlikely they’ll do the same behaviour to you because you demonstrated such strength; this is why bullies get used to their success and they’ll behaviour becomes a

habit – because although it’s not socially reinforced its not disapproved of. In the case of what we are saying where we are predicting, challenging, and out doing our opponents for leadership in a social circumstance we are looking to deliver successful insults but delivered as part of the “expectable flow of conversation, A successful insult is one that is done within the expectable flow of conversational moves, inserting double meanings so that on one level it remains appropriate, Put-downs and one-upmanship are successful when the onus for breaking the smooth playing out of the interaction goes to the recipient, who incurs dishonour either by being unable to shoot back a smooth and appropriate reply, or by breaking the frame entirely with an angry outburst.” (Goffman’s Model of Conflict; Collins,R. (2005). Individual advantage – gaining a monopoly in social interactions requires being incredibly adaptive – you must find the normal rituals of cohesion, use of respect, situational politeness and start pushing the boundaries out; using the very brink of what is allowed to progress towards bargaining for the advantages you require to increase your power – our ego, and unique capacities need to used constructively displaying adaptive traits to understand, address, and offer solutions for the goals of the group and its members; while bargaining for one’s selfish desires. Ok; I know what you’re thinking – you get it, you get that you need to be impressive – right? That makes sense; but how do you keep it; I mean the idea is to get people into the palm of our hands and do something with it? Relations of power create dependence – where the actors become mutually dependent on you; this inequality in power distribution; allows the “costs that

person A can impose on person B” –these costs might just be the level of attention you impose and the commitment you except to focus on the ideas you present. Remember in escalation of commitment theory – that if someone is gradually increasing the amount of expense; the cost; the investment they put into a project they are more inclined to invest further than they are to quit the project entirely – even if it looks like the project will fail. This means; B will be unable to consider the alternative opportunities available to him or her simply because their opportunity cost considering the level of investment in this relationship makes it impossible to leave – not only that but our aim as a Charming Gentlemen is to deliver actual value; to be beneficial to others but while doing so imposing a high cost; through this we gain our advantages – friendship, political support, etc. Linda, M (1981:29) One of the advantages in gaining control of resources that B has access to; is that you may be able to gain hold of their external values in addition to the values that they hold internally; for example you may be able to gain access to their friendship groups, perhaps their Facebook social networks for the purpose of advertisement of your products; and other things such as being able to target and identify their resourceful friends and then re-focus your attack onto those and their networks.

Gain

interest

from

strangers

in

highly

competitive markets. Once you’ve demonstrated some unique quality, you will have attention from those who are seeking new opportunity in search of higher value.

It’s the belief of ‘sexual capitalism’; that there are two types of interactions between people. There are the interactions where attention has been assigned between two strangers for some kind of arranged time period. And the circumstances where someone doesn’t really know what they are placing their attention on, because there is too much competition and they don’t have a particular assigned motivation or goal, and therefore have not engaged in a process of assignment in order to meet that utility. Or it might be that someone is on a particular assigned attention path, and that they don’t have the space to compute some addition entity to place their attention on. In this chapter we will cover the latter of these two scenarios. Why in many group scenarios can we not gain any interest from strangers? And how to gain interest in these highly competitive scenarios The core to building a strategy for gaining the attention of strangers in situations where attention is highly competed for is to bare in mind the principle that all economic agents want value, particularly value that shares commonality with their own desires, passions and motivations, and things that are unique, and appear to be in demand; Tend to be valuable.. If you can imagine, what it’s like to adopt a child, you originally make the commitment, meet the child and overtime of watching it grow and develop as a result of your efforts, you care about it and eventually love it. This is how all relationships build, they begin with the most minute of participation. And then they can progress into complete commitment. This philosophy allows us to understand how people in busy nightclubs/bars (where spare attention is scarce) interpret who is

valuable and who isn’t and then using this we can change the way value is perceived. The way we will achieve this is by developing unique characteristics that make us stick out and appear valuable to onlookers. Such large quantities of people often causes impact on the play of attention; we can assume that If people are naturally always seeking the most beneficial option, but are bewilded with infinite but yet similar choices, then they have little choice but to divide their investment in the choices by infinity, and therefore place no investment on either opportunity presented to them or a minimum amount. Our recommendation within such circumstances moves back to the business strategies advised by Michael Porter about developing unique qualities, and the marketing strategies that cite ‘frequency of exposure’, ‘duration of exposure; and the like as potential sources of ensuring that you attributed greater attribution of value than your competitors within scenarios where you would-otherwise be ignored. I constantly hear about guys going into nightclubs and not knowing why they can’t gain any interest from a girl all night. When I witness these guys, they are circling around the girl on the dance floor who has twenty other guys hitting on here, doing the exact same thing they are doing, damaging their own ego, and preparing to go home and spend the night bashing themselves up for their silly mistake, only to make the same mistake the following week. This girl simply doesn’t have the time to interpret which guy out of the lot of you is the most valuable and therefore the most benefit to her, let alone all the other opportunities outside of the club in the rest of her social life.

Meeting strangers isn’t easy! People have too much communication noise competing for their attention; they have their own lives to consider, the noise of the environment, the noise of lost opportunity (opportunity cost) as they could be speaking to someone else. This is why the best advice other authors offer is to isolate the target i.e. find a quiet place to speak to strangers after you meet them; for this reason it’s often being suggested that bars and nightclubs are poor social venues to meet people; that it would be better to spend more time with; tourists, café’ goers, etc. who find it easier to pay attention to your ideas. It all depends on what you want to achieve; but in my view, all the fun, exciting people; are out at night; and there inhibitions are way lower; every environment has its own unwritten rules of what’s acceptable behaviour – and the fact of the matter is, at night, in bars and clubs you can be whoever you want to be, you can act however you want and its socially acceptable. If we are going to choose nightclubs (a highly competitive environment) as an example of how to meet people; then we need to be sure to properly explain the dynamics of the situation in the tone of the framework we’ve outlined in this book. The question we are asking is; “How in this noisy crammed competitive environment where gaining someone’s attention is so tricky can we be expected to influence the most in demand agents?” In magical performance we are often afforded the luxury of people being willing to be entertained, they are sitting down ready, or standing around aware that a magician is going to perform on them this evening. Even in street hypnotism we typically talk to people who are sitting outside, have some kind

of time available. We need to be aware that in seduction our goal is two part; I) Be able to isolate agent (whether they are preisolated or we built social value to take them) and II) to hold attention when we isolate them. This argument can help us understand why hypnotists tend to struggle to hypnotize a 100% of people. Because the results depend on the situation in which the agent is selected. In street hypnosis, you request that someone’s time is allocated to you, to engage in a process, you also frame that it will be outside of their control. Providing someone follows these steps, then they will be hypnotized (I rarely use inductions, conversational has always been my thing). The way we get others to activate a concept in their heads; is the easy part. For example we could place the idea in a girls head that 'I really fancy him” then according to the theory outlined in the neurology section of the book we have a method for achieving this i.e. 'having her activate the schemas associated with fancying someone, and in particular - me. The only reason she won't do this is because she will resist your attempt based on the very fact that she has no commitment to you, and has other opportunities in her life to consider and thus has never given you her full attention. Also if she did agree to pretend for a moment that was true, she'd probably be playing along and might resist by imagining all the ways in which you’re not attractive, in order to give herself a less biased perspective. This is all a very well and good theory, 'that you can someone covertly place the idea into a girls head that she fancies you' however there is the problem, that’s this: Welcome to life. You’re the tiniest little grain of sand on an endless beach of grains. When we attempt to speak to a hot girl in a competitive

environment (where lots of guys are fighting for her attention) then without any way of getting out of this perfect market failure then we are not going to close her. In fact, it goes one step further, her preconceptions about what her life should be like, her mobile phone, Facebook, preconceptions about what makes a guy attractive, are all opportunities begging for her attention that she has placed more value on than you Mr Grain Of Sand. (source: Wikipedia ‘perfect competition’) Without a method, a plan on which agents to target and select for seduction then just approaching a girl in a nightclub will most likely result in a cold blank refusal, if not a slap. There won't be an opportunity to have her imagine she fancies you, you won't even get a moment to utter a word. It’s for this reason that we need some kind of process of selecting who we speak to. Clearly those girls who have a lot of guys hitting on them, or seem preoccupied in their minds cannot be used for our little hypnotic experiment. If you spend all night hitting on girls who are competed for you’re going to go home very frustrated at your inability to pull girls. Providing their isn’t any preconception frames, about what’s valuable to them, about who’s valuable, what goals they have defined in their life. Expected physical traits of the person attempting to seduce them, then they will comply. However all of these productivity pathways are often activated without having someone temporary suspend their disbelief and agree to play along with you for a time being. People say; “Vince….Wouldn’t it be great if, someone could just point out a girl in the crowd and say ‘make her cluck like a

chicken’ and you could” Under certain circumstances, people’s attention is competed for by so many other sources. People who know me think I hypnotize everyone I meet, this simply isn’t true, I work very hard to pick agents. If someone pointed out a subject and said “hypnotize that person there…” I would go through a specific procedure to defy the odds of you can only hypnotize 1 in 5 people rule. . I would always argue that the majority of success with hypnosis comes down to set up, the way you manage and select subjects yet this is something that is never talked about in hypnosis training courses and books. Many who know of me as a hypnotist, magician will be surprised by me saying this as it seems from my videos and when you’ve seen me that I seem to engage audiences and have them comply to my requests that quickly seems to result in them believing, hallucinating anything I ask of them. However, this is an optimistic oversimplification of the process that I engage in to select subjects… the truth is, in the majority of my interactions that result in someone becoming hypnotized I met them outside in smoking areas, terrace areas, in front of the club or in the chill out section of the club. The subject was sitting there, waiting for something interesting to happen and wasn’t fighting off guys, girls, stepping on their shoes, or spilling drinks over their outfit every few seconds. They agreed to chat to me, and then they agreed that I could borrow their attention for a time to show them something cool, motivating or interesting. In the cases where I seemed to find bar-staff, bouncers, party goers in the noisy nightclub who got hypnotized this occurred because I might have talked to everyone and announced I was a hypnotist and noticed who actually gave me the time of day to

really explain myself rather than just ignoring me, or perhaps they saw me playing with a deck of playing cards, or performing a trick or hypnosis on someone else and they looked interested when I did this, essentially giving me an indicator of interest, and then I would ask this person to place their attention on me for a moment, to which the person consented and then we continued to do either magic or hypnotism. Whether it’s training guys who have been studying how to get girls and practicing in the field, or hypnotists & magicians who are trying to get people to feel fascinated, I constantly am told “She just ignores me?” or “do you ever find that you just can’t get the hot girls to pay attention to you?” or that “You can’t hypnotize in noisy environments”. All of these moans and groans are down to being unable to engage your audience. To grab hold of that initial wedge of attention, of interest in your presence and turn it into something greatly more impressive. Most of the time, rather than a problem with the actual hypnotic technique It’s a personality problem between hypnotist and subject, or a venue problem in the sense that there are too many people competing a agents attention. These guys are not necessarily wrong to moan; nightclubs are a nightmare for trying to get attention and have an assigned portion of time with any particular girl you think is attractive. This is why using a standard ‘hit or miss’ hypnotic approach isn’t going to get the girl. In a hectic environment a persuasion approach would have to look entirely different compared to the persuasion approach you would use door-to-door sales, in a retail outlet, a therapy room, or a stage hypnosis show. Because in hectic environments the

engagement with the subject might be fleeting, you might only have a few moments, fragments of attention. We have shown that people’s motivations are driven by a quest for higher utility, for value, but this is thwarted by their lack of computation abilities. That people use quick fixes, such as social norms, repetition of values, anchoring of values, in order to make judgments within a time frame. We sacrifice, we take the information we can to attempt to build a map of the world. Beinhocker: (2007) our attention is guided by the expected utility received, deducing the competing opportunities, discounted (Risk) by the probability of achieving the expected utility. That is to say that if an opportunity you presented, seemed to offer enough value then it would be irrelevant of all the other competition and the costs on her part as the rewards would be so great. That is to say that people don’t really know where opportunities that benefit their lives are hidden, they use quick fix judgments to make decisions. Like how in demand an item seems to be, like how unique an item looks etc. We draw causal links assumptions from causal-data-sets amongst incomplete data(primed variables, short time, unfamiliar territory). Then these values are used to trigger an action or thought that is issued in the executive processing within the pre-frontal lobes; which then triggers various associations in the impulsivesemantically-associative parts of the brain. No one is going to follow our instructions or suggestions if you don’t have that slightest glimmer of fascination from them, of interest and attention from them that you can later expand upon. And if they believe your intent is anything other than a ‘game’ or

a process that benefits them, they will be unwilling to engage in the process. And thereby recall the opposing associations to the ones that you offer…. Unless of course someone has all the time in the world, and is willing to try something different, but it’s extremely unlikely that you find someone with no other competitive stresses bidding for their attention; ‘like work in the morning’, ‘saving money’, ‘planning chores’, ‘that guy their seeing’, ‘expectations of what guy they deserve’ etc. Gaining someone’s attention or interest even in the mildest form is always the first step. As shown in a study of post-it-notes. When a random number was written on a post-it-note, it caused participants to use that number in their answers to questions. This significantly increased when attention was paid to the number for just a second.

1. (Be unique) How to develop the charisma of a performer. The beginning of creating value always comes from the comparison between yourself and others. Even if one person in the world was similar to you, it would divide the price you could sell yourself at in half. In the economics chapter of this book, Michael Porter outlined that in order to dominate a marketplace (i.e. to receive the most benefit) we need to differentiate from our competition in a way that they can’t mimic. This is the same for creating social attention. If we want to be noticed over everyone else, this means dressing differently, not just randomly different, but difficult to achieve different. We need to produce a character, a clear brand in the mind of our audiences. That means cleverly

owning our character, it all fitting together in some coherent format that makes sense in our audience’s minds. By being different, when we greet people in a venue, they will clearly remember us for next time we see them. This will allow us stick out as a primed feature in everyone's minds yet they struggle to know each other. As we will be the easiest person for them to recall their minds will naturally run towards us, for whom to look for to make decisions, and to feel attraction. Like Seth Godin’s purple cow (Godin, S. (2003), when you’ve seen mile after mile of fields full of cows even a slightly different cow is boring… What truly is amazing is remarkable, will make you sit up in your seat and go “WOW” is a purple cow. That’s what we are trying to become. “We often don't realize that our attitude toward something has been influenced by the number of times we have been exposed to it in the past... in one study the more frequently a person's face was flashed on a computer screen…The more subjects came to like that person in a later interaction” Cialdini, R. (2007). When you've built a recognizable character when you enter a venue you will notice people who look at you and already seem to want to talk to you. How do you build character? Well, let’s give an example that way we can explore, Imagine; you really want to get famous! You get your big break for one night only you’re a central character in a popular soap opera. Next day, you wake up you want to get famous off the back of this, and you want people to come up-to you in the street and applaud your previous night’s performance, what would you do? Perhaps, you could wear the same outfit you wore in the show, and act in the same manner, and hopefully someone will come and ask for an autograph.

This is how to build a character that people immediately recognize, you take on board the features on which people use to define you and you exaggerate them. Part of our character, is not defined only by ourselves, but by the company we appear to keep, therefore 'name-dropping' often works! When humans interpret the world, they see symbols that they recognize from previous learning’s, they use symbols about you, to icon-a-nize you. The more easily people identify you, the more they will remember, and see you as memorable and likeable. Most books on persuasion cover body language and confidence saying that these are important things to have. No where throughout this text have we told you just to be confident. If you closely analyze the consistency of this book you will find that no where does it allude to such states existing, or any emotional or psychological state for that matter. The fact is there is no difference in the brain from a confident person to a non-confident person. There’s no special technique you can suddenly use on your own brain to make yourself into a confident person, it’s a naturally occurring process that comes from feedback from the environment. If you change what you do in the external world and start having more fun and influencing it, you’ll be confident byproxy. However, some of the techniques in the book require you to look like you’ve already ‘made it’, that you’ve already achieved everything you want in your life. The reason you need to come across like your already successful is because we all have high expectations in what we want to achieve from a mating partner and from what we expect from

friend selection. The reality is these ‘hopes’ are confined by our personal limitations. Therefore we are likely to be disappointed with the quality of friends and relationships we achieve. If you give the impression that your happy and comfortable with the way things are going in your life, at least other people might be led to believe that your actually achieving your dreams, and therefore you might get a partner, friendships, job opportunities and other things somewhere towards your expectations. Techniques that make you come across happy and successful involve, Leaning back when you speak rather than leaning in creates the effect that you’re laid back and comfortable in your own skin. Speaking slowly and with authority delivers the impression that you know exactly what you’re saying and you know that you’re as good as you need to be. Looking in the eyes of people you’re speaking to. Smiling at people you meet, greeting everyone and not being afraid to be different and touch people. Speak with a booming voice, like your confident and people listen to you, rather than a scared mouse-like voice like you’ve been beaten around your entire life. You often hear the phrase “You can’t change a first impression”. As much as I dislike such pop-psychology twaddle, because you can change a first impression, the statement still holds a great deal of truth. A better statement would be, it’s difficult to change a first impression. You've probably handed out a business card, or your phone number. And found people holding it, staring at it half an hour after you gave them it. You might be wondering, what are they staring out? Haven't they read it already?

What are they thinking about.... they are going along with what little you've gave them and treating it as your brand, the concept of you, your position within the marketplace, you using what's unique about you and holding it as a competitive business offering. Just like people starring at your business card, when you enter a room, when you approach a new group, when you stand a bar people will look at you and they are learning about your brand, they aren't really thinking about anything… They are just staring like the people with the business card. It’s important to build a personality strategy, that way you are set up on how to greet people, how to smile, and how to act, dress and other things in a social situation. This simplifies complexities like ‘Be confident’ and instead gives you a script, a character to play and exaggerate. Your apparent confidence is the quality of your acting, how well you deliver your best embodiment of this character. Underneath it all, it’s hard to find our true personality; it’s a progressive thing that is uncovered by the events in our life. By focusing on delivering a performance you will always appear confident even if you’re confused by the ongoing problematic events in your life.

2. Gain peoples interest. Social attention, you know that feeling when you walk in a room and everyone goes quiet, they are all waiting and competing to get a chance to speak to you. That’s the kind of attention we want.

However, like all great journeys start with a single foot step so does every relationship. Every human connection begins by having just that little bit of fascination and interest from someone. Initially no one knows who you are. But with every greeting, every handshake, every head nod and “Hi” you’ve locked in some demand. The more people that watch you, the more frequently they see you and the more commitment they’ve made into your brand, then the more socially in demand you are. When we first start off forming an acquaintance with someone it first starts off with initial eye contact, exchange of smiles, some form of greeting such as a “Hi” and then slowly our body language becomes more aligned with that person. We begin facing that person straight on and the level of touching increases between one another. Perhaps we get each other to do small favors for one another and share secrets and before you know it we have a full blown 20 year relationship with that person…. You use likeability factors to build the relationship. By acting like you already know the people you’re talking to it avoids any awkwardness, and believe that they really do somehow know you. Building connections with as many people as possible is the key to becoming locally known. This will allow you to stick out as the best possible choice for a dating partner, or a figure to look upto for recommendations and advice possible. As you increase the involvement & connection that every individual feels with you. And they invest more of their time and effort into maintaining that relationship you become more popular. The frequency you’re seen, the intensity of the connections, the proximity to the people who have seen you. how physically

close you were geographically to them. All influence how strong your relationships with your audiences are. That initial flicker of the imagination can quickly be the lead, be the anchor that grounds all thoughts, beliefs, actions and feelings about the nature of reality surrounding. You become the social norm that must be copied, mimicked. As wrote by Seth Godin (2008:5) “A movement is thrilling. It’s the work of many people, all connected, all seeking something better” we want to create this hypnotic effect in our interactions. To build, social situations that engage. We need to meet as many people as possible. Our initial interactions with people might start off humble, but that doesn't matter. All beginnings start small and a handshake, a head nod, a high five or a greeting such as “Nice Jacket” will suffice. When you enter a room, you should make an effort to smile and say “hi” to everyone you brush past as if you already know them. Your positive and upbeat and seem to have an energy that other people notice, and then they feel happy too. Be a positive person - laugh, smile, make other people happy. It’s been shown by numerous studies that speaking positively about other people, yourself, and life, makes people associate good feelings and liability with you. And that liability makes us extremely persuasive! If you see something that is clearly recognizable you’re likely to remember it and be attracted to it. If you use these factors to make yourself memorable you will receive social attention. To create massive attention, you need to be as recognizable to the largest collective of people, as frequently as possible. To

allude to already being this guy means acting like you’re the guy who seems like he knows people who knows people. With every friendship you generate it’s important to appear as a friend, rather than that you’re trying to get something out of the person. If you give the appearance that the person your forming a relationship is in demand and you’re not then it’s likely that you will be treated as lacking value and the person will pay no attention to you. Acting as a friend, means offering value to the person; by offering innovative content, ways of life, experiences, stories for free then you will come across interesting and exciting, rather than manipulative and a user. Generating a friendship should be seen as the opening stage to any relationship and it begins by sharing content. A quick way of building friendship can be supporting her life and social position, this is because (social economically speaking) you will be reducing her effort costs in maintaining her 'ego-value' level, one way we do this is by listening to someone's emotional hooks and creating commonality i.e. implying similarities amongst yourself and the person your speaking with. Lastly, some people are already responsive to you. You know the people who look at you when you enter a room. When you speak to someone or speak loudly they turn around to watch! Don’t forget about these guys! If you keep your eyes peeled you will spot those people who are already responsive to your social value. When you walk in who is looking out the corner of their eye, remember girls have greater peripheral vision, so if you look at them straight on you will never see them look at you because they've already turned away (even if they are interested). Remember if you’re trying to work with people that aren't currently responding then you have

to develop social phenomena that will make those individuals responsive. Remember: Always creation social attention: i.e. the social proof and likeability before demanding responsiveness, because people always seek higher utility, and therefore will be response to you when you illustrate you offer that.

3.

Gain social proof.

Now that you are recognized, you should be working on locking in the demand from the people you speak to. This means that you need to separate yourself slightly from your audience, so they need you and you don't need them. One way you can create a power imbalance between yourself and your audience is to lead people and expect compliance when you push and pull people physically or ask people to do things, or to separate individuals from the rest of their group by guiding them with you. When building responsiveness from new audiences it’s important to bare in mind that in most venues that you enter someone else will already have a hot room i.e. this means that they already have exposure to the majority of people there. The people who usually get all the benefits i.e. persuasiveness/attractiveness are these people. This makes people attracted to them and thus they usually get first pick of who they socialize with. To complete with the people who have already heated up a venue might mean spending months being a regular to that place, or it might mean working on a way to super-heat a room in a single evening. But

how do you go about taking a venue from freezing cold to smoking hot in a single night? To become absolutely attractive requires absolute power; to reposition to acquire a position of best-fit, that is impossible to acquire by any other player, having a unique offer of surplus that cannot be achieved by any other competitor and you dictate the absolute focus of bargaining become successful requires Leverage, stretching and cheating advantages. You have to have something that no one else can get and demand explicit concentration for that content. Building supply and demand, to be in demand requires two elements (a. uniqueness & b. limited supply) the extent of which depends on the demand and the supply of substitute products. Uniqueness is something that is covered in the competitive advantage part of the book; and how to develop unique positioning however, with regards to groups being the performer, being in a locked in position with everyone around you does exactly that. Speak loudly so everyone can hear you and have people crowd round you by getting a lot of interaction. This isn’t the guaranteed 100% method to seduce anyone; It’s just explaining how you can, get more people to notice you, spot these agents, then covertly escalate them onto further commitment to you, by identifying agents who are ready to engage, or by identifying the sources of competition and developing unique positioning within the environment to reallocate interest onto you then working with their attention, you will find yourself experiencing, long periods of uninterrupted success. If you understand what is going on around you, you never actually fail because everything that occurs is predicted within your model. You know where the

pockets of success and fail are, and you can seek and avoid as necessary. A little piece of attention, on you as an individual can quickly be expanded to occupy more space in their awareness than they initially planned, building their level of involvement within the movement can easily grow. As shown by Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C., (1966) When people in a housing estate were asked to have a large ugly sign on their front lawn, advising motorists driving by to slow down, 17% of residents accepted. However, this rose to 76% of residents accepting when two weeks prior they were asked to put a small sticker on their front window advising motorists to slow down. Getting people involved in small movement initially can lead to massive involvement later on. These techniques, play up to the sense that you are in short supply and in great demand because, not only does it make the listener like you, and therefore put you in demand from them. But also, implying that you have positive relations with lots of people. And enjoy life,makes you appear valuable. Being attractive isn't defined by looks, but how surrounded by people you appear to be, how often you smile, use touch, and build interest from those around you (appear in demand) One method (warming up a venue) to achieve this is standing in the center of the circle it delivers the impression that your ideas contain greater weight than other peoples. A longer term approach (entering a hot venue) could be to develop various tribes with you acting as a leader, having and inner circle, and an outer circle, then onlookers. Having a unique perspective on life, makes you appear original, therefore meaning that you have no competition for those ideas,

Porter, M.E. (1985) making them, by economic definition more valuable. Dawkins, R (1976). It’s likely that original ideas, like being in demand, cause people to pay attention to you, potentially tripling your suggestive effect! Whether early on in the relationship, or several hours or days down the line, the rule is true that the greater percentage of time and effort of others you take, the more committed they'll be to you, and whatever terms you dictate will be attractive by definition of your higher utility offering.

Identifying Targets When I first became a hypnotist I wouldn’t have any process for deciding who I went to hypnotize, therefore I would choose subjects who were clearly not wanting to spend their time listening to me, and were just being forced into engaging in this hypnosis procedure with me, then I would beat myself up mentally when I failed to hypnotize that person. This mind-set does not exist in this pua-hypnosis approach that I’m outlining. Once you’ve built a unique identity, it’s important to then spot who is responding to it. Who is paying you attention for brief moments and then use these people and that’s precisely what we will discuss how to do in this chapter. For example; This evening I was sitting in a booth on the edge of a dance floor, a girl was standing leaning against the edge of the booth, I said to my friends to move along as to allow her to sit down, I told her to sit and she sat in the newly allocated space. This was her passing compliance test number one, leaning across my friends to talk to her I took hold of her hand and pulled her

so she was leaning across the table to speak to me, I asked “what’s your name”. (compliance test number 2) I then pulled her across my friends so she had to climb over them so she was sitting on my lap (compliance test number 3), I tilted by head and she tilted in response (mimicking my social learning, this was compliance test 4) I kissed her. With the pick up example described above, the reason it worked is because the girl was standing on the edge of the dance floor therefore she was clearly a agent, as she had spare attention, she clearly had free time and her attention wasn’t been occupied by anything in particular. I had her agree to sit down, which was a form of agreement, then I had her lean over to talk to me, and then had her sit on my lap, this progressive affiliation and agreement to my requests coupled with her initial agreement to participate in this process allowed a successful pick up. This is why its essential that you choose agent that you are capable of winning on, because then they will have the time to listen to your plausible deniabilities, your excuses that you tell as you accidentally touch her, make eye contact and isolate her. But you’re not going to get this far unless you get your agentspotting eyes on. With hypnotic subjects, I will have them stand around me for a little bit before I hypnotize them, I tend to watch when I speak who is listening to me, who is paying attention to me when I walk around a venue, then I assume they will be responsive to me, I believe thattheir attention isn’t being competed for, or that my competitors for their attention are not as unique, or as useful to the watcher as I am for them, and therefore I have their interest.

Before you expect to escalate with someone you need formal or informal agreement from the agent to engage in this process of complying with your basic instructions. Without a properly set up agent, i.e. you’ve clearly got their attention for a while, then pick up like hypnosis is impossible at this stage (unless of course they become an interested agent midway through). This philosophy states that people are always looking for something more motivating or interesting that seems to offer them greater utility. The problem is often people are unable to spot this opportunity because they have already ‘bought into’ a way of life or being that is repetitive and therefore safer. Other people are ready and available to have their attention played with, and providing what your offering seems to be a good offer, and then they will be happy to engage in the process for a time period that doesn’t conflict with their other interests. I.e. if you hold someone for too long who only expected you to show them something briefly they might suddenly consider the opportunity your showing them to be unprofitable for them rather than a beneficial experience. It’s important, instead of beating yourself up for not seducing or hypnotizing everyone. Instead providing you know exactly the reasons why you selected that agent or the agent you selected rejected you, then you can understand every step of the process. Knowing exactly what is occurring and what you are doing is much more important than trying to pull everyone. For years I’ve searched for the holy grail of hypnotizing everybody or seducing everybody. It’s just backwards thinking to think like that. If the environment creates the right conditions and you do

the required steps, then providing there are no hip cups or mistakes, which there usually are. Then it will work. In hypnosis, there are two reasons why 90% of hypnotists fail on subjects they could have otherwise got. Firstly they didn’t properly outline a to the subject that there is a set time period for them to listen and comply with your instruction, and the second mistake hypnotists make is they make suggestions for their subjects to act ‘not hypnotized’, that is to say they slip up in their language and blame the subject for not understanding and thus complying with the request. When a seducer gets into a conversation with a girl it often results in a positive experience for both parties, even if it’s just meeting each other. Typically on seduction boot camps I’ve noticed that when my students finally get into a conversation with a girl it usually results in some kind of close even with very basic method to their approach. However we tend to make this hard on ourselves, by picking agents that are difficult to talk to, this is because we don’t recognize what agents to target and instead choose based on no reasoning except perhaps how attractive she seems. we blame ourselves and our subjects for the fact that we never set up a time period where we could engage in a conversation with our subject, and we were never clear exactly on the method or goal that we were trying to achieve and thus illustrate with the girl we are targeting. This self-blame is really damaging to your ego… Believe me I’ve been there, I’ve kicked myself for not picking up girls who I never even managed to get into a full conversation with. How can I possibly justify that? If I tap her on the shoulder and say hi and she can’t hear me, then it’s not acceptable for me to

blame myself that I didn’t pick her up, the approach was unlikely to work. She never engaged in a time period to communicate with me, and therefore I could never properly illustrate the range of instructions that I wanted her to participate in. When I was a teenager, my results with girls were incredible. But the main cause of my results was that that I didn’t see failure as an option. I really needed somewhere to stay. I really thought kissing as many girls as I could per night was the most interesting thing I could be doing with my time. I didn’t pick based on who was most attractive, even though I’ve always been into especially pretty girls. I chose my agents based on who I knew i could close, whose attention I could find a way of holding. Sure I might do things to soft test my environment, for example I might wear a peacocked outfit and notice who pays attention to me and then open them, I might wave across the room as if I’m waving to a friend and see which girls take notice. Knowing how to run your wins, and pick winners; is like a performer’s license, it allows you to get results like a rock star and have everyone notice and talk about you. Many people who hang around with me all the time might say that I never fail to hypnotize, but they don’t see how careful I’m being, how select I’m being. Sure I’ve created a way of being that naturally is careful for me, for example I might wait for people to participate in my world, to hang around me a bit before I hypnotize them. I don’t just go out there and try to push random strangers into hypnosis. I try to be chilled and relaxed about it and pull people in. In seduction it’s the same thing, the results touted around the

internet about what it takes to be one of the best seducers is something between 5-10 girls a month for a full close. Ok I know what some of you are thinking right? That I’m being defeatist that I’m saying, ‘don’t try on the people you can’t get’ I’m not, this same strategy of being unique, talking to everyone, gaining interest from the agent, will get the party girl who has twenty guys surrounding her, just remember to use the strategy properly, don’t compete like all the other guys do, else you’ll just run into the problems they are hitting. You could easily spend the entire night trying to get party girls in the centre of the dance floor surrounded by guys using the specified method, but you might never gain her interest and therefore never progress onto escalation. For this reason, I recommend pick the agents without competitors for their attention. Most nights of gaming last only between 4-6hours and you could easily lose a significant portion of time trying to gain the party girl who doesn’t have time for you. But you might end up going back to your house numberless, kiss-less, dateless, sexless, you’ve gained nothing! So why not just do what works best. Many new hypnotists I talk to, want a challenge; they challenge themselves to hypnotize the person that resists them. Then when they think back in their memory over the past month and they wonder why they’ve not hypnotized anyone then they mentally beat themselves up, blaming themselves that they are a poor hypnotist. But really they chose to fail just because they thought it would be fun or interesting. After years of being a hypnotist and countless subjects you really get over this need to work with resistant subjects.

The same applies for seduction, you don’t want to be looking back over your months of seduction and think ‘jeez I didn’t get any girls, PUA doesn’t work’ just because you wanted to pull in the most difficult situation. You want to be leaning back with a smile across your face thinking ‘I’ve kissed seven girls this week’ while everyone else complains about their unhappy love life, or that their job is boring them. Typically if you isolate someone, i.e. separate the subject from their friends then the person will be ready to listen to what you have to say. It tends to work better if the subject is relaxed. The reasons people struggle to reach this stage, is nightclubs are highly competitive and guys will jump all over girls and cause them a great deal of stress to try and gain their attention. Typically if you isolate someone, i.e. separate the subject from their friends then the person will be ready to listen to what you have to say. It tends to work better if the subject is relaxed. The reasons people struggle to reach this stage, is nightclubs are highly competitive and guys will jump all over girls and cause them a great deal of stress to try and gain their attention. For this reason girls will often give each individual guy only the tiniest portion of their attention. It has been said by various pick up artists that a hot girl will be hit on 30 times a day. As then qualified by these pick up artists, this only happens to certain girls who tend to get that sort of reaction. But none the less the point remains; girls really don’t have a lot of time for men they don’t know personally. Firstly there are places where peoples preparation to be attentive and engage with a process are better; and therefore if you want to results more consistently then its best to agent these places as there is naturally less competition for attention, places suchlike:



Outdoor smoking areas



Waiting in cues to clubs with girls



Meeting people through people



House parties



After parties



Tourists

When people aren’t in this ‘ready to pay you attention state’, they will naturally discriminate against you, as the guy/girl isn’t interested in engaging in that process with you as they are preoccupied with another goal in their mind. Just as sometimes men discriminate about what is their type, whether they really want the girl and bring all their preconceptions about what they want sometimes, and then overtimes they have no discrimination’s, they are just horny, full of life, and want to stick it in something. Girls are the same, sometimes they care about types, other times they just want to have something put inside of them and feel used. There are only a handful of girls in a given club who are actually genuinely dancing, genuinely feeling the moment, who are up on life. Unless you’ve got an opportunity to take the girls who are ‘cold’ the ones who have only come out because their friends are out, the ones who still have oneititus from their last boyfriend, or from the guy that they half know, or they simply don’t feel genuine because of work, career, worries, money. Sure given the opportunity for them to place their attention on you, and you talk to them you can change this, but in a highly competitive environment you simply can’t bank on that until you isolate them. By ensuring that your visible, and are increasing your audience participation by being seen frequently having small investment

etc. into your character in order to them check who’s responsive to you. This essentially is an extension of the idea of seduction community’s theory of ‘Indicators of interest’. This theory believes that you can check whether someone is attracted to you, by looking out for certain criteria or by throwing out a test and checking a response. You shouldn’t expect to convert everyone over to you at once, instead you can pick off those who are responsive to you and then slowly try to get round to their friends also. The same works in the club; 

Look everyone in the eye… hold gaze, smile, wait for them to turn away, if they turn back within 45 seconds they are into you.



When you’re near a group of girls and you’ve created attention (i.e. by eye contact or presence i.e. speaking loudly) see who moves round to your side of their social circle to be close to you.



When you step back from a group of girls see who watches you leave (i.e. because they have attention on you and are therefore responsive)



When you lean in to kiss a girl on the cheek, or hug, move slowly across her face during the interaction, perhaps to also kiss the other cheek if she leans in slightly, then its likely she wanted to kiss you, memorize this for later to build the tension further.



When you put your hand on her back during a casual chat, does she shrug her shoulders to indirectly shake your arm off, or does she let you keep it there. Does she respond by touching you? If you’re unsure maybe you should increase the interaction by holding her arm in order to find out if she then rejects you.

Pick up, hypnotism and persuasion is risk free-guaranteed to work. Ok that’s a lie! It’s not it fails all the time. A little bit of failure here, a little bit of failure there. The trick that makes it seem as if you really get everyone is that you run your wins and you cut your losses. You quickly spot who is complying with you and advance their interest. Or you take someone who is complying with you then they start un-complying and then you get them back complying again and build interest, or you take someone who is uncompliant, and you end up turning them compliant. If you have the ability to spot who is listening to you, and who is ignoring you. Then you’ll be good at this and you can have one-hundredper cent results for yourself because you’ll only use those who are responders. We all naturally have the ability to know who is truly listening to us and who isn’t I think the thing that holds those of us back who currently don’t feel like we have this ability, is that we have had poor results with girls in our life, and therefore we feel negative about other people’s opinions of us, so we don’t let ourselves see that people are really responding quite negatively to us. In street hypnosis we are constantly assessing whether someone is likely to move on to the next stage of the interaction with us, the same goes for attraction, before someone moves onto the further attraction stages we are constantly assessing whether they are likely to move with us into these stages. If we touch a girl on her back, and she doesn’t throw us off, then this shows that she is likely to respond to the next aspect of compliance, she is without knowing it moving through the stage model because

of her responsiveness or lack of resistance to our undercover persistence. Compliance is the way that some guys (who haven’t had any training) ‘naturals’ just automatically know that a girl is into them and is going to eat anything out of their hand. The difference between a natural and a non-natural, the natural has the ability to notice who is responding to them, and nonnaturals just don’t have a clue and tend never to push their For example you might walk into a club with your shoulders back, smiling, you slowly scan and make eye contact with everyone in the club you turn away and turn back and every girl turns and smiles at you. To call this an IOI would confuse the term. Because it wasn’t spontaneous, it’s a reaction to you being a source of utility (in this case positive emotion, genetic need to nurture because of cuteness phenomena). You threw out a compliance test, and you checked who responded to the test. These IOI’s were a response to the soft compliance test that you already put out there; you just did a test and observed the results to see who was an eligible fascination candidate. This essentially is an extension of the idea of seduction community’s theory of ‘Indicators of interest’. This theory believes that you can check whether someone is attracted to you, by looking out for certain criteria or by throwing out a test and checking a response. Country to popular belief within the pickup community, no indicator of interest is ever spontaneous, the reason a girl is looking at you isn’t because she’s giving you an indicator of interest it’s because she’s responding to something you’ve already done.

It could be said that every indicator of interest is always a forced IOI. What is the look? Leaning in to you, Smiling, Eye contact, standing proximate to you, The reality is you have a lot of competitors, more than any other industry you’ll compete in for the rest of your life. Rarely is an IOI really an IOI. It’s more of a reaction, a response. Seduction is like a little wedge, that you get in there from building responsiveness, but once someone is complying to you, it’s pretty much guaranteed that when you put another test of compliance in front of them they are likely to respond to it. Any flicker of fascination, any response, any compliance has the ability to be exaggerated, brought to the foreground. And any imagining can easily be primed, anchored and the like through frequent exposure to it and feelings of similarity to the concept, and pressure to accept to idea quickly else lose opportunity to gain potential benefits. The best persuaders are those type of attention seekers, you know the ones? The smiling guy who is the life of the party, they just have to constantly have everyone looking at them. The times you noticed it, is the times it annoyed you. But typically these people are very successful at winning people over to do their bidding. They are great at using soft compliance tests as jokes, as hints, they get people to participate, to play to their beckon. When you persuade, you must be aware that you are guiding attention, and have a sense of whether people are coming with you, or whether they are being unresponsive. The only way to check this is by throwing out soft tests, and gaining commitment off your participants.

The most fun and engaging people in the world. Aren't afraid to be themselves! They take leadership through holding and guiding people, showing that their way to go, is the best way. They push those around them to do things that they never would have done before and enjoy it! Because it was positive. Because its fun! To be liked, and to be a leader, requires that you lead by example. Show that you've got what makes the world tick, the ultimate positive energy, and those around you will seek. Remember if you do spot that someone is complying with you then you’re OK to progress that compliance into a bigger commitment, by perhaps increasing the levels of kino escalation or eye contact frequency and duration. Here are some tips on how to constantly soft compliance check the room: 

watch who’s watching you,



Be aware who changes their rhythm to match yours.



Check who steps forwards towards you when you step back



Accidentally touch people by accident and see if they reach to touch you



Change your bodily rhythm to copy that of the person you’re trying to charm.



Throw out big signals to create attention, be noisy, eye contact everyone, extravagance.



Walk around in a zig zag like pattern when you walk, so you move closely to everyone at some point and to watch who leans in to you as you walk away, these people are responsive to you.

Know what you’re up against, read the venue, that way you can’t blame yourself when you don’t pick up any girls. Look around and spot the ‘hot energies’ and the ‘cold energies’ both in guys and girls, be aware that a hot energy might quickly meet a guy, or have just been with a guy and for that reason she might decline you because she is locked into his monopoly. (A girl isn’t really ever declining, she’s just doing something else) To bring this back to hypnotism, I will often once I gain someone’s attention I might take them outside to an isolated area to perform the hypnosis, this way I can be sure that they have committed to the process in the sense that they have left their friends and gone for a walk with me. And I can check visually if they appear to be listening to what I am saying. In seduction a lot of the game is considered ‘won’ the moment that you do this exact move, the moment you have took the girl to an isolated area and begun escalating it usually quickly leads to a kiss close or more providing you bounce to a location where further intimacy is possible. And therefore we will move onto the next discuss about how to esculate someones commitment to you.

Holding someone’s attention, progressing commitment. We’ve so far considered how to gain attention in an environment where attention is scarce. How to speak to the most in demand person in a venue and have them agree to some kind of interaction that lasts a underlying period of time. Understanding how attention is allocated can make you realize that you aren’t failing when you fail to gain attention from girls in nightclubs.

It’s just that the environment was way too competitive and the agent’s attention was divided between you and the other competitors and the other ideas in their life, and they couldn’t establish any reason or utility for why their attention should be allocated to you. Now we would like to cover, what to do when you gain a girls sole attention for a time period. This is typically when you are sitting down with a girl, or for a moment she has separated from her friends, or just the fact that you are in some kind of dialog with her, maybe you’ve exchanged a couple of sentences. How do you proceed to seduce her from this point? Attraction isn’t a switch that suddenly flicks on; it’s a process where someone negotiates different stages with you. It’s that little flicker of interest or fascination. Someone will never admit they are attracted to you till long after they are fully pining for you, because the truth is they simply have too much choice about whether they are attracted to you or not at the moment – they can compare and contrast different concept-perspectives – as they are all economically equal i.e. no one is more primed. Take the choice away by increasing the amount of investment that the person you’re speaking to has in you then suddenly they are locked into your monopoly and by definition attracted. I believe these economic perspectives give further depth to the seduction debates between tribe building versus persuasion/hypnotic tactics. Our aim with whoever we spoke to should be to demand their attention. By having this attitude we can then notice when some individuals are compliant to others while actively avoid placing their attention on us.

Finding the moment I tend to ‘people watch’ a fair bit, and the majority of the time two people begin interacting with each other who were originally strangers is that they suddenly found a moment where their energy matched. And during that moment they then came together through some kind of interaction, whether it was eye contact, touch, or close proximity. That is to say, when you want to interact with a girl, you should find a way to match her energy, or have her be proximate to your presence, or have shown interest in you before you then begin to make the interaction happen. Usually a situational moment is followed by a comment such as, “I think that outfit is great”, “your so happy”, something you state about yourself “I’m in such a good mood”, or something about the environment “It’s great in here isn’t it?” it could be that the song in the background is progressing towards a peak. One of the things it can be is that you two seem to share various things in common, for example you might be dancing in the same manner, or matching each other’s vibe energy, for example moving in the same rhythm, smiling in the same manner, then suddenly this provides a reason to suddenly begin interacting. Often I will purposely go out to create this effect, or notice which girls are copying my energy, the way I move, the way I smile, and because we are similar we really get on when we begin interacting. Commonality has been shown by scientists and economist theorists to be one of the main cause for partnerships, as it lowers costs experienced as an individual as you work together producing synergies as a team. Its just a moment where you

suddenly acknowledge that your both not separate identities, you both are together under some kind of shared context and you point this out. There are many courses such as Ross Jeffries course and Head Hacking’s course that make the recommendation that when you meet someone you should follow the CIQ method. All that means is you should follow the format of, complimenting someone “hey that’s a cool t-shirt,” introduction “my name is Vince”, question “so what do you study at university then?”, or “So have you been working today?” Our essential conversational structure isn’t that dis-similar, we are just analysing the logic of such snippets of conversation under a bigger magnifying glass. If you want to get really good as a hypnotist the most important skill you can learn is the actual approach of meeting strangers and giving them a positive perception of your character as a cool person. If you view it as, ‘shit I’ve got to go out there and find a hot girl and take her home’ you’ll probably make a load of mistakes. But consider this the way that I’m framing it and you’ll see it as far easier. If you just go out there and search for people you can engage, then you’re onto winners. Sure from there we need some technique. And I guess initially you’re not entirely sure what a ‘ready to engage person’ looks like. But it’s just a person who has no other competitors for their attention. As an example of a strategy you could take, you could chat to her friends, or make friends with some of guys surrounding her. That way you will appear more valuable than them and she might feel that she has now a clear priority list for who to put

her most attention on, This works, to speak in economic terms, because you’re a larger player because you’ve performed a merger to dominate a larger market share. It’s no guarantee, but if you could actually let her believe you were the coolest guy around and actually perform such a merger, yeah you’d probably get her attention.

Implied Suggestions Some suggestions are implied, by the situation themselves. Often these are the most powerful form of suggestion as the subject merely assumes it to be true without you having slowly have them experience it indirectly and thus come to become aware of it. For example; Your close to a girl physically, you have your arm around her and she has a hand placed on your chest. The implied suggestion is that you and her both want to be with each other sexually. Often thoughts following feelings, which follow situations. We are seeding ideas into a girls head while at the same time not giving them any reason to resist. By ensuring that there is plenty of compliance and responsiveness you are preventing any negative backlash as a result of bringing up ideas. The idea I recommend seeding is to imply that she fancies you, but without blatantly saying it as this will 80% of the time cause resistance. The way you stand, letting her look at you, having her place her arm around you, or hand on your chest, or be talking to her in the corner of the room alone, all imply that she fancies you. Providing you can maintain that frame, then she’ll likely start feeling those feelings. The implied suggestion; of being physically close, and physical intimacy implies a sexual vibe, that she fancies you, the implied suggestion of being alone with each other, and holding each

other. or being in one’s bedroom implies that you’re going to have sex. There are several specific routines that myself and my friends who I have been talking to perform in order to create a scenario that implies that she fancies you. Close your eyes….. I won’t kiss you I then don’t kiss her and she opens her eyes. During the time she was thinking about whether I would ‘actually kiss her’ and probably decided that it wouldn’t matter if I did because it would be funny. Or some other reason, she might have imagined what it would be like if I did kiss her, and thinks about how much she fancies me. The following line comes from Freddy Jacquin, when used in the right context, with the right attitude it should have her imagine the scenario of staying together. While at the same time preventing any resistance due to the breaking of the moment, the words you use go as follows “Don’t imagine how good it would be to spend the night together tonight.” (Smile) (walk away) the smiling and walk away leave her to explore that hypothetical context or her response to you but without having to necessary react negatively towards you because you’ve already left. This routine came about from my days running a website called ‘team handsome’. Since the creation of ‘this model’ I’ve been performing it again, I hand the girl a business card, which either mentions something about ‘handsome’ or ‘being a man’ or ‘with photo of yourself on’ let her look at the business card for a moment, then say I’m good looking, (pause) in this picture, right (smile) because your smiling and you’ve given her a gift that she’s already interacting with, then she’s tempted to agree. Because you’ve almost said it as a joke, then it prevents

resistance as you might not really know how good looking you are, you might just be playing with her, and therefore it’s her job not to put you down. Often during a hypnosis routine with a girl, to begin the routine I might Take their hand, and kiss them on the hand. Considering that they are about to be hypnotized by me, this sets a frame whereby if they continue agreeing to play along with the hypnotic procedure while at the same time questioning whether I fancy them/they fancy me, means there is both compliance and imagination at the same time. Which encourages the result we desire. Often during a mind reading routine; where I pretend to read a thought from someone’s mind, I might ask them to think of a word. And as they think of that word, I tell them that I can see their lips moving as they think of it. I touch their lips, and then lean in close and touch my own lips as if this is how I’m interpreting what word she is thinking of. The general rule of thumb is not to express interest in a girl who you are speaking to, rather to play around with building their interest. One way I go about doing this, is I find ways to talk about what I like about the girl but without directly telling her what I think. For example instead of saying “your stunning” I might say “That necklace is stunning”. Or I might think a girl is gorgeous, but instead say “I’m in such a gorgeous mood”. We’ve already covered the “I’m so fucking hot… it’s so fucking hot in here” I’d like to credit Arash Dibazar for the following two suggestions “What really turns you on… (wait to see her face thinking) what’s your passions in life?” and “Are you passionate?... (wait to see her face thinking) what are you passionate about in life ”I’d recommend using sentences such as

“Do you fancy me… and you… going outside… I need to check on someone” or “I need to steal you away for a moment…” this kind of language brings up associations and sexual ideas. “I love people who are willing to try anything once, be adventurous, you only live once” This phrase focuses on freedom and mildly alludes to sexual freedom. You might begin an imaginative exercise by asking her to “go into a fantasy”, “Flirt with this idea…. For a moment” as this way you’ve gave direct associations for an idea yet you’ve not built any resistance for them not to comply with you. As a counter example to illustrate further how a sentence would fail, imagine the instruction to “Kiss me” at that point when you say that the girl has a choice. If she wants to kiss you, she will likely decline as the moment is inappropriate and doesn’t feel natural. If she doesn’t want to kiss you, then this will probably emphasize her reasons further for why she isn’t attracted to you, this opinion of you might be difficult to change now that she has confirmed that is her opinion about you. “If you were an Animal, what animal would you be?”, “There’s something very animalistic about you” “Which side of the Bed do you sleep on…. (wait to see her answer) because apparently the side of the bed you sleep on is how you think, like if you sleep on the left your more in touch with your feelings, and if you sleep on the right you can be really spontaneous” “You’re not broody girl are you, just trying to meet a guy to have kids with him? (laughs) you wouldn’t believe all the girls trying to get their hands on my genetic code” “Try not to fall victim for my charms”

“I really cherish…. (Look her straight in the eyes) This necklace, my friend gave it me as a gift” “What’s the most daring thing you’ve done, tell me something adventurous about yourself” “I daren’t touch you, you seem too delicate” “Do you think this drink is delicious, point at her drink?” “What do you Desire… where do you see yourself in 10 years’ time” “Haha your easy to get along with” “I’m Eager to learn about you” “I could expose you, I’m a body language expert, I can read your mind” “You’re a Feisty one aren’t you?” “Flirt with this idea for a moment” “I need some fluids in me, to rejuvenate me… (Take a sip yourself) (pass her drink) here you take a sip” “Your pretty frisky… you seem to have this energy inside of you, just wanting to come out” “So now you know about me and all my Glory, let me hear about you?” “I’m in such a gorgeous mood” “Haha I can hear you groaning… but I can’t tell what you’re saying”

“I can tell you’re headstrong, once you set your mind on something you want it so bad” “I would hypnotize you but I don’t want to intimidate you” “I bet you can be Impulsive” “I’m going to do you for Indecent exposure that outfit it too good” or “I’m indecently exposing, I’ve just been told I need to do up more buttons on my shirt” “You’re an impulsive person, you get an idea in your head and you go with it” “Be discreet I don’t want my ex to spot us” “I don’t want to Inhibit or restrain you to stay with me here in any way” “You seem so innocent are you a good girl or a bad girl? What do you think I am, my friends say I’m a badboy” “I don’t mean to be insistent, but are we going to the bar”, When she requests something of you “You’re so insistent”, or “if you so insist” “Let’s go somewhere a little more intimate” “You’re not intoxicated are you?” implies that she might try it on with you. “I hear stories about intoxicated girls in Britain” “I’ve just been travelling I’m getting itchy feet again” “Let’s make her jealous” “I need to go for a Leak”

“I like the color of your Lipstick” “You little Skimpy thing” “Your sporting quite a slender frame, aren’t you my dear?” “I’m always told that I Pout, show me your best pout” “My heart is beating really strangely, feel my pulse (place her fingers on your wrist) you feel that? “ The above were just a few examples of how you could use sexual language in your conversations, really rather than individual short catchphrases as listed above you should naturally drop these words and phrases into your conversations.

How to escalate commitment In order to demonstrate – how trust works in relationship formation; we are going to use the example of the opposite sex – but I use this method whether it’s for meeting people to gain self-employed work, or to build partnerships from networking. Many people reading this book – will have taken the advice offered and related to building attraction with the opposite sex; and therefore we have a responsibility to offer ways of progressing the relationship from its very humble beginnings (sharing the same venue) into an actual interaction. Our ability to trust others – has been developed over millions of years of evolution – There are specific regions in the brain associated with trust - “the fact that trust at a basic personal level is psychologically rewarding is unsurprising. The more difficult questions from a psychological point of view concern the mechanisms which permit this desirable and rewarding state of affairs to come about.” – almost undoubtedly trust occurs the

majority of the time accidentally – you happen to know someone – who seems genuinely nice; and they happen to go to the same places you do and have similar interests to you – They might be able to help you if you need help. When we meet people – we need to make it seem like an accident – yet progressively move them towards the things we want, in persuasion this is referred to as ‘foot in the door technique’. “It’s a compliance tactic that involves getting a person to agree to a large request by first setting them up by having that person agree to a modest request. Burger, J. M. (1999) The foot-in-the-door technique succeeds due to a basic human reality that social scientists call “successive approximations”. Basically, the more a subject goes along with small requests or commitments, the more likely that subject is to continue in a desired direction of attitude or behavioural change and feel obligated to go along with larger requests”. Dillard, J. (1990) Everyone is unique; this means they have huge potential to network with other similar people – but also the huge problem of no one being similar enough to them – people are alone in this world and it would be nice to have some form of help. Think about this; Imagine for a moment you had the ability to predict, just three seconds into the future; you perhaps would know whether to double your money on your hand in a blackjack game, whether to call “ALL IN” on the last hand of a poker game; three seconds might give you enough time to put a final bet down on a roulette wheel; so you could guess roughly where the ball would land? But perhaps that’s just small beans, imagine if you could accurately predict which stock was going to jump a few points, what if you could see all of these stocks that

jump a few points simultaneously, then you could play multiple positions and make more money faster. Your probably hoping that this book is about to offer the solution to predict the future; if there was a solution I wouldn’t be sitting here writing this book; I would be a billionaire perhaps having someone else write a book like this for me, while I take over the world; OK that’s enough of dreams that isn’t going to happen. But that’s the attraction isn’t it? To alcohol, to drugs, to others, to jobs? We hope that the next little decision we make, is going to be the one that changes everything; that our lives will never ever been the same ever again. Sure, sometimes or most the time; we don’t believe that anything is going to change – we’ve locked into this doomed investment – and we expect we will be stuck here until we die or a midlife crisis hits us; but occasionally you’ve got that look on your face; like perhaps your about to win big – and at this point you start taking risks; gambling, expecting that this next shot – is your time to shine. There are plenty of reasons why we are different to the person we are speaking to; but it’s important that you only highlight differences that are strategic advantages that the other person would like to acquire (i.e. like self-confidence) – that is to say, we should aim to build an image in another’s mind of all the good qualities that they would like to see in you – so they will only be able to see through that frame. But the moment you say or do something wrong then they will see you through the frame that you’re ugly, etc. According to the NLP encyclopaedia (nlpuniversitypress.com: Dilts, R. DeLozier, J.: 2000) the term ‘frame’ is used to refer to a general focus or direction that provides an overall guidance for thoughts and

actions during an interaction. Frames greatly influence the way specific experiences and events are interpreted and responded to. The reason we become attracted to someone in the first place, is because they stick out as the most profitable choice compared to the competition. As several research study shows, romantic attraction is more dynamic...than just personality features... for example commonality amongst partners, etc. the other important element is strategic enterprise. Having more utility benefit, is a motivating factor for all agents, such as humans... therefore we are mathematically inclined to form relationships. Relationships dramatically increase utility. When you approach a stranger – there should be an accidental reason or excuse for why your speaking to her. Her opportunities are aligned with her current team-mates – the way she has economized her life. You cannot, and should not; just walk up to a stranger. You need to have a reason for being there. For example if she’s on the dance floor, then you should pretend that your dancing having fun near or next to her, as the premise for the reason that your conversation, or interaction, begins. Perhaps your dancing and you grab hold of her arm and spin her round in a circle, that way it seems as if the whole process of meeting her was accidental, spontaneous and nothing to do with how physically attractive she is. A classic way of ‘the indirect approach’ is like what you see guys do in the cinema, they might lean over to get some popcorn, or yawn and as they do they raise their arms above their shoulders and put them around the girl as they relax, as if by accident. That

is to say they increased the amount of kino in the interaction by escalating the kino during an offbeat; they had a reason or guise that seemed to justify increased interaction. Perhaps you want to lock eyes with a girl in the bar, you can’t simply just lock eyes with her, that would give away your game, it would look like it’s entirely planned, however you might be clearly and obviously looking for a friend and as you look for your friend you lock eyes with your agent. You use your ability to misdirect the attention of the agent to ‘shroud over’ your escalation exercises. You might say, “hey those are really nice shoes,” while leaning your hand against her leg while pointing down at her shoe. What is happening her is more blood will rush to the area of the body you are touching, and it will become more sensitive and her attention will be drawn to you touching her leg, but because you simultaneously talked and pointed at her shoe, the interaction goes un-noticed, you’ve now made it seem acceptable to accidentally touch each other in intimate areas and the next touch that you give will be more easily accepted as it won’t seem like your just doing it to ‘try it on’ as it will somehow also be framed as an accident because of the previous touch. Also now that you have framed accidental intimate touch as acceptable, she might find herself accidentally touching you, and then that will be a clear sign to you that she is wanting the interaction to progress further. The indirect approach also offers ideas for how to move around a nightclub. You want to somehow check which girls in the club are interested in you but without looking like you’re trying it on with any one of them. One tactic is that you could look around with wide eyes and attempt to make eye contact with everyone. Another tactic is to when you move around a nightclub you

should never move in a straight line, you should have moments where you move towards almost everyone and then move away from them in a zigzag trajectory. What this does, is it creates onbeats, moments where your appear to be almost approaching someone, when you’re not really, your clearly just wandering the venue, and then just as you get close to them you move off in the other direction as you continue the path of the zigzag. This creates a moment of ‘onbeat’ where your approaching, and offbeat when your moving away. The girls who are responsive to you will watch you as you begin moving away but blank you as your moving close. These girls who are hyper responsive to your progressive absence, are somewhat interested in you. They could be said to be indifferent to your charm, something about you has opened a doorway to them. We’ve discussed the indirect approach and compliance. Both these concepts rely on the fact that you are progressively getting a girl to invest more heavily in the interaction with you, to feel conditioned to respond to you in several areas. These areas are; Touching, Eye Contact, Proximity, Sharing, and voice. We want them to become used to our presence and for them to feel comfortable to exert their presence over us. An important aspect of pick up is escalation of touch, eye contact, proximity, isolation without making it seem false, forced, put on, formal, arranged, pre-planned etc. it should feel spontaneous, accidental, automatic, passionate, electric, sparkle, natural, lustful. So to do this we have various recommendations when meeting girls, Lightly touch her abdomen as if by accident. Hold her back as you pull her forwards so she talks into your hear so you can hear what she’s saying loudly. And Hold her

back, accidentally touch her bum as you lean into her ear, look her in the eye as you move across her face, sometimes be very close as if your lips could touch but only for a moment as you move across to do something else. Often guys will make the mistake that they will wait to escalate in any of these five areas, they might wait for a sign from the girl to check that she’s really comfortable with that kind of interaction; they are too respectful to the girls, thinking that they are somehow protecting her. This is completely backwards, the whole point of the indirect approach and escalation is that you have a reason for escalating that side-tracks any debate over whether you’re being too pushy with the girl or whether it’s ok to begin escalating touch. Because she can’t prove the reason your escalating is because you’re hitting on her, then she’s instead likely to believe that it’s just for the misdirection or plausible deniability reasons that you’ve mentioned. The time to start escalating is from the beginning of the conversation. If you wait for a time to escalate it might come across fake when you begin doing it, as if you’re doing it because you’re into the girl rather than correctly building the illusion that it is your nature or character to be touchy-feel type of person. This means hugging her on open, holding her round the abdomen, looking her straight in the eyes, while at the same time talking about some other topic entirely (indirect) if your ever challenged on your intentions ‘are you hitting on me’ the response is ‘no are you hitting on me’ or ‘what do all you think I am is sex on legs?’

How do you know when it’s a good time to escalate onto the next stage of intimacy, if you put a test out, for example you held her round her lower back as you leaned across the table to grab something, and she didn’t actively knock your arm off her, then its ok to progress onto a further stage of intimacy. In pick up language this could be to say, instead of waiting for her to give you indicators of interest to show that she likes you, instead progress as if she likes you until she gives you a clear signal that you’ve overstepped the mark, also known as a indicator of disinterest. This is the principle that most successful naturals in the club work on they just go out there and they act a bit ‘larey’ and they act as if it’s just their character and nature to touch girls, to make sexual innuendo’s and big themselves up. To say these guys do badly at picking up girls is just untrue. You might insult them but they are actually doing a good job, you could argue they don’t know what they are doing, but they just have another way of describing it. Typical understanding of the concept of ‘indicators of interest’, might question me and say, Ok, so you mean “When a girl brushes her hair… she’s into me right” Well yes I do mean that “Or when she leans in” Yes, “Or when she goes to touch me or hold my hand” yeah these are all good ways of knowing a girl is into you. But these are after you’ve initiated the interaction and then begun escalating the amount of touch that you’re using on her. You already had her from the moment that she allocated her attention onto you over all other competing moments for her attention. If you know when people are on the verge of listening to you, on the verge of being attracted to you, and on the verge of kissing

you, on the verge of being in love with you. You can track their progress through the stages. And push them into the next stage. It all starts with just a little bit of interest, just a little bit of fascination. Don’t feel bad for using these tricks to progress your participants through the compliance tests with you, remember your audience always has the choice to walk away if they don’t want to listen to you or be touched by you. It’s just a test, and typically it’s a 100% fail free test because we can do smaller tests first that prove that they are likely to follow the upcoming test. For example you might smile and see if they smile back in order to see if they are responding to you, and learning from you. Using this process of social conditioning we condition them to accept our touch and to touch us in response, to accept our eye contact and deliver eye contact in response without ever giving the impression we are ‘into them’ They simply don’t have to stand there and listen to you. If they are there talking to you, and letting you touch, guide, and are showing signs are copying and mimicking you then they are responsive, and this can be molded. Sure they aren’t attracted to you. But they could be providing you guide them through the necessary steps without overtly showing them that you want them to be interested in you. Once they kiss you, and once they are calling you every hour then they know they are attracted to you but until then they are unaware of their emergent involvement with you. If you ask them at any moment ‘are you attracted’ or your body language signals your attracted to them which causes them to ask themselves the question ‘am I attracted to him’ they will always find the answer is ‘no’ because your competing with infinite

number of other moments that are competing for their attention, it’s a perfectly competitive market. If we can mold their fascination and cause them to feel emotional investment to us, then they want to nurture and protect that investment and you’ll have a monopoly over their attention. For example, before we decide whether it’s acceptable to enter someone’s physical space (i.e. less than half a meter standing from them) we enter their space to make a comment about something else and then leave while watching her responsiveness to this test. This allows gain understanding of how she will respond to physical proximity before you achieve it. In order to understand whether she’s likely to accept your arm around her back, you can test this by lightly holding her arm when speaking to her. We already know we are going to succeed with the girl before we move to any of the next stages. Before we know that she will respond to gazing into your eyes for long periods of time, we can test looking into their eyes through stories and conversations where eye contact is an important part of the story. “Do I look like a drug dealer to you?” Stares straight into her eyes. “If you look straight into my eyes you’ll get hypnotized” by doing this you are building the frequency and consistency of her mind being used to gaining eye contact with you while at the same time having a reason or excuse for why you’re getting her to look you straight in the eyes. We mentioned that there are levels of intimacy. Although there isn’t a strict chart, there are various mini checkpoints that you

might want to aim for, with Kino Escalation the following stages could be outlined; -

Hugging

-

Touching her hand

-

Touching her forearm

-

Touching her shoulder

-

Touching her back

-

Touching her lower back

-

Touching her face

-

Kissing on the cheek

-

Touching her neck

-

Kissing

-

Touching her legs

-

Touching her bum

With eye contact the various progression should be that initially your sharing brief moments of eye contact, then slightly longer moments, until your eventually sharing deep and meaningful gazes into each other’s eyes. In addition to the duration of the eye contact is the frequency of looks exchanged between each other. Ultimately when you come to that point in the conversation when a kiss is likely to happen you will be staring regularly at each other’s lips and then back at their eyes, this is a common automatic process that humans seem to engage in before they begin kissing with one another. With proximity, -

Briefly near the person of interest and then move away in passing.

-

Standing about 6ft with your backs half turned towards each other.

-

Standing about a meter away from each other.

-

Fleeting moments of standing about half a meter away from each other

-

Fleeting moments of briefly being in each others personal space, perhaps a body part accidentally touching the other person.

-

Constantly standing half a meter away from each other

-

Constantly in each other’s personal space.

With sharing of secrets; -

Their name, their living location, their education, their career status

-

Their close friendship groups

-

Their hobbies and interests

-

Information about childhood

-

Their ambitions, hopes, dreams

-

Their internal life philosophy, how luck works, what’s right and wrong,

-

What it feels like when they fall in love with someone.

With sharing of your voice, I think it’s useful that you just get used to each other’s voice. -

At first you won’t really understand what each other is saying because of accents at the words used in the interaction. At first when speaking to people it’s useful to use very

simple language. Repeating words on purpose so they get used to the sound. -

Then you will begin to understand each other

-

Then you will be ok to understand each other in a noisy environment, but revert back to using simple instruction.

-

Then you will be able to have more detailed conversations

-

Then you will be able to understand each other with some detail.

Another important factor is the time duration that you’ve held her attention for. As a general rule of thumb if you’ve held her attention for longer than 10 minutes in one form or another then you should be doing great with the girl. If you’ve managed to hold her attention for over 30 minutes then you’re in a great position to close the girl on either a kiss close or progress into something more provided you’ve built the sexual vibe. It always struck me how easy people find it to explore this side to their personality with a therapist – or a strange guy in a night club, but how difficult they seem to find it amongst the noise of day to day living. – Amongst all the noise – while with another person one can find a kind of peace with themselves. Have you ever had that feeling – where you’re truly powerful. That your energy is solid and contained in your mental life – that your attention is exact and precise – and instead of being at your desk writing – your perfectly awake and in a nightclub/bar? Maybe you have? – Well its incredible – everyone is running around with so much noise; they can’t concentrate on anything; not even their own thoughts; and in a half intelligent

conversation they can’t handle it – when you feel like this – people are completely attracted to you; you seem like the coolest person ever – so contained. This is because “people are strategically attracted – to those with whom – their resources could be properly aligned in pursuit of higher utility” – We try to form teams – the same way with a therapist we explore our own psychodynamic themes in order to understand ourselves to better align ourselves with our goals – and desires in the world – we feel that through the exploration of our unique abilities; with another is profitable – in order to have someone feel like this we need to have them explore. 

Learn to be generous with your time



Give people your full attention



See people as noisy that occur outside of you – bring them into your calm.



Escalation Routines



Building a personal connection

It’s your job to progress the responsiveness onto sexualized responses. The way we build further involvement from agents for attraction is to create the physical and mental intimacy. This begins to occur throughout the comfort stage of the interaction, when you begin making the conversation last further than 5 minutes. Building a ‘You’ & ‘Her’ Connection. To create a personal feeling of intimacy, to create this personal connection between you and her, as if you are a secret group who has information about the world which no one else would understand. How to make an approach seem natural - You might notice that you do end up meeting strangers, a lot of the time an interaction

happens, that is when you begin talking, or interacting with a stranger; the reason for your ‘coming together’ was that something ‘situational’ occurred. It might be that you notice something situational about the person you spot, “I think that outfit is great”, “your so happy”, something you state about yourself “I’m in such a good mood”, or something about the environment “Its great in here isn’t it?” it could be that the song in the background is progressing towards a peak. One of the things it can be is that you two seem to share various things in common, for example you might be dancing in the same manner, or matching each other’s vibe energy, for example moving in the same rhythm, smiling in the same manner. Commonality has been shown by scientists and economist theorists to be one of the main cause for partnerships, as it lowers costs experienced as an individual as you work together producing synergies as a team. Its just a moment where you suddenly acknowledge that your both notseparate identities, you both are together under some kind of shared context and you point this out. Be interesting, learn about her. Build her emotional investment in the interaction through a series of steps. This is the essence of escalation. Building her effort in maintaining the interaction, you then pace her effort and then use this as a springboard for your further escalation of soft-testing her. If you’re struggling to get information so you can know more about her. Then try listening to her ‘buzzwords’, challenge her opinion. After she says a fact about herself, give her a pause so you make sure she has time to expand on what she is saying. If

she doesn’t expand you can ‘paraphrase’ this is where you summarize what she said with a question mark on the end (?) or you can simply say ‘And?’ to have her explain further what she means. Rather than rushing onto asking more questions. This is a dangerous part of the conversation period where you opener can just run out. Or you might just find yourself asking interview questions like the girl your speaking to is, a suspect in a police station for questioning. If she talks about her ambitions being a doctor and that she’s very career focused. You can mention that you value hard work, and give her an somewhat jokey illustrative guide of how your lives might both fit together in five years’ time. “Haha, I’d have to be the cook in the house with you doing all those long late night shifts? I bet you can’t cook right, you don’t seem the cooking kind of girl”. This way she will be imagine you together which makes that reality more primed and believable to her than other alternative realities, making her have more emotional investment in you over those potential choices (you seem more reliable, she can imagine it better, etc.). Learning about her. It’s important to learn about her during this stage, listen to the things that makes her different and mention them. If she wiggles her nose when she talks, mention it! If she stands in a peculiar way or has a cool/husky/funny voice then you should mention that; 

“what do you do?”



“Where do you live?”



“What university did you go?”



“what did you want to be when you grow up?”



“What would your ideal life look like?”

Sometimes you won’t get a lot of signals from a girl, this is why you need to keep on attempting to escalate her responsiveness because this gives you a signal, when you come to a point where she isn’t progressing any further, this lets you know how interested the girl currently is in you. In hypnosis, if you don’t manage to get someone go to the next stage of a phenomena, you backtrack onto the previous phenomena, and use phenomena similar to that, and then springboard from those phenomena back on to attempting to move to the previously failed phenomena. One of the common mistakes that would-be-seducers make is that they tend to ask questions, without fully listening to the answers and not expanding the story further. They just hear the answer and continue to the next question. Stick with her answers and don’t rush onto the next question!!!! Get more information from her by paraphrasing and reflecting her information back. Remember, these questions can often be boring as she’s probably answered them a billion times. For me I don’t mind I personally like talking about myself, but for many girls they’d rather find something different and interesting to talk about. There is nothing particularly bad about these conversational topics but remember the reason your talking to each other is because there is kind of this shared energy between you, these other details are more kind of qualifying whether you should be speaking to this person, rather than being positive and having a good time with this person. Every answer that she gives you to questions, it’s important that you somehow relate what she’s saying to your experience, this

creates a sense of commonality, and therefore implies that you have synergistic zero sum benefits from working together. So if she states that she studies business at university, you can talk about how you studied it in high school. If she mentions that she wanted to be a dolphin trainer when she grows up, mention that you think animals are cool and you want to go travelling or go on a safari, and get her to imagine what it would be like if you both shared the trip. If she talks about her ambitions being a doctor and that she’s very career focused. You can mention that you value hard work, and give her an somewhat jokey illustrative guide of how your lives might both fit together in five years’ time. “Haha, I’d have to be the cook in the house with you doing all those long late night shifts? I bet you can’t cook right, you don’t seem the cooking kind of girl”. This way she will be imagine you together which makes that reality more primed and believable to her than other alternative realities, making her have more emotional investment in you over those potential choices (you seem more reliable, she can imagine it better, etc.). The same applies in seduction. If a girl rejects your touch; for example you were touching her back and she shrugs you off. Then its important in response to this, that you back off slightly, and don’t increase any touching towards intimate areas such as her back until you’ve escalated responsiveness in other areas such as eye contact, duration of the conversation, and depth and sharing of secrets. For example, you might retreat back to merely touching her forearm, and then eventually move forwards again, and then progress onto touching her arm a little more, before re attempting to move to for example touching her back. The same

applies for any of the other escalation recommendations also, for example the exchange of secrets, or small favors, or eye contact. Of course you can increase the responsiveness of any type of phenomena throughout an interaction by focusing on soft compliance testing and pacing and leading the response in the direction you want. But for attraction between “You and her” you need to focus on four escalations. You need to be escalating, or increasing the conditioned increment of response in four areas. By doing this she will be conditioned to respond to you, or have this interaction with you which she cannot achieve from anyone else without significant effort, thereby causing you to have a slightly monopoly over her, that is to say “she is emotionally invested” i)

eye contact (duration & frequency of)

ii)

sharing of secrets (quantity and quality)

iii)

Touch (from light touches to petting)

iv)

physical proximity. (from a metre standing away to leaning etc. on each other).

Thoughts follow situations. If you create a situation that looks like she’s going to close, then she’s going to close. If you’ve managed to meet all the criteria on the above list without giving away that your ‘stealing her value’ then she’ll comply and respond to any following test. When your being indirect, you want to be increasing these four things, and all these four things should never be given away that you’re doing it to increase the amount of interaction you’re getting with each other. So I see it as, you use a guise or a gimmick in order to get say more touch, so you never give away that you really want touch, so you use another situation to create

the touch, like in the cinema where to guy yawns to get the touch, that’s the classic example of how to get touch and you always have a reason for getting the touch, it’s like in a bar when you’re like “let’s go to the bar” and you put your arm around her to take her to the bar, the reason I’m touching her isn’t because I’m trying to get more touch accepted into the relationship, that I’m trying to condition ‘its ok to touch’ the reason I’m touching is because I’m trying to go to the bar. Or the reason I’m touching is “oh I really like this top” (grabs hold of the back of her top) “who’s it made by” and I’m now touching her back. I’ve designed a range of attraction routines that people play with each other to build up the relationship between two people, the reason we use these games is to misdirect the attention away from the fact that your increasing eye contact, revealing secrets, increasing the amount of kino and are entering each other’s personal space and onto the silliness of a game or conversation about something completely devoid of the agent of ‘liking’ someone.

Approaching Approaching – there are a series of routines that guys and girls play in bars and nightclubs in order to build the physical contact between each other. I’ve spent a great deal of time people watching. I’ve noticed that girls and guys will ask for lighters & Cigarettes from people just to create a conversation and not necessarily because they smoke. Also in many cases people ask for lighters even when they have one in their pocket anyway. You often hear of young guys buying lighters to take out with them on a night out not because

they smoke, but so that they can light cigarettes for girls and therefore gain a conversation. Another more intimate way to light a cigarette is to light it buy touching the end of someone else’s cigarette while it is in their mouth as you suck on your own cigarette, this creates physical intimacy of both of your faces and you can use this as an opportunity to look her straight in the eyes. Asking to take a photo on a digital camera. A lot of guys and girls will take out a digital camera with them not just to gain photographs of themselves having fun in order to convey social value with their internet friends. Also they use it as a pivot in order to create interactions with strangers, as the strangers have to take the photograph. Girls will often pass their camera to guys to take a picture in order to create a conversation, asking the guy to take a photograph of them. Then the guy will traditionally take a photo of himself as a joke, or have a photo with the group of girls afterwards in order for him to try and create more interaction with them. All in all allowing further conversation from originally being strangers without ever conveying interest as the gimmick offers a distraction from the fact that we are attractive and opposite genders out in a darkened room for no particular reason. Here are some suggestions of gimmick openers to open with; i)

Pretend you know them already is a guise that many people use to attract the opposite sex. It allows a conversation to begin about the friend that you know that looks just like them without making it apparent that your “hitting on them” this allows you to progress through the conversation without being

noticed as trying to steal value from them, while they discover the good qualities about you. ii)

High Fives. When you see someone who looks at you, or a cool moment happens perhaps that a song hits a beat or that you catch the eye of someone close to you. It can be good to give them a high five. “Give me a high five, up a above, down before… ah way too slow.”

iii)

Asking for the time, it’s a old time technique to open up a conversation with a stranger to learn what the time is. The way you can continue this interaction beyond them just blurting out the number is you can set the time on a watch while you have the stranger stand there and watch you set the time.

iv)

Bang into people by accident and apologize. A lot of guys and girls will bump into each other ‘accidently’ just to build a conversation through the apology of knocking them.

v)

Borrowing a chair or another object item that belongs to the venue in order to start a conversation “Is anybody using that chair?”.

vi)

“Hey guys, does anyone have a pen I really need to Borrow one”

vii)

Accidentally spill their drink so you can offer to buy them a new one. Then you buy them a drink to make up for it, and use this guise to encourage a conversation.

In addition to these approaches you can use many of the escalation guises as openers, for example I often use the nail vanish on guys Routine the “I’m getting my hair dyed” routine.

There’s also a cheat, I call it the performer cheat. The way you use it goes like this “hey, I’ve just got back from a gig, I’m a performer actually and I’m just cooling down, is it ok if I show you some stuff?” alternatively you can use it saying that you’re on the way to a gig, either today or tomorrow and that your just heating up. It doesn’t matter if you’re not a performer because you can simply say that you run workshops on body language or some sort of thing, I often say it even if I haven’t had a gig all week. Once you’ve used the performer cheat then you can go onto other routines and use them as the opener in addition and then move back to the performer thing at a later moment if you so choose. So I might brush past her hands and say “you’ve got really cold hands, are you sure you don’t have circulation problems, I’m always really warm, how come it’s always the guy who’s really warm and the girl who’s really cold.” From here I can then continue to use escalation routines, that increase the physical touch, proximity, and regularity of eye contact so that these phenomena become conditioned and a habitual pattern for the mind of the girl I’m speaking to. If you’re worried about the fact that you’re not a performer, you can simply perform the basic palm reading routine that’s outlined in the following escalating section of this book, and also use this basic suggestion routine that I’m also going to cover.

Opening lines and conversations to use during opening. By using topics during the opener that allow you to achieve eye contact, touch, and other phenomena, that meanwhile distract the agent from the fact that your ‘hitting on them’ are important

as these will allow you get far down the line of seducing him or her before he or she realizes that you are the driving force in the increased interaction between you two, this is known in the seduction community as the ‘indirect approach’. We all have many areas of utility in our lives that are pushing for our time and attention, and the reality is that if you ask a person before they are in ‘love’ with you whether they are attracted to you they will likely say no. People value their time and effort based on how much utility they perceive will result from the interaction compared to all other opportunities that they could derive utility from. The way you cause someone to discover how much they like you to the extent that it is love is by leading them down a track where the feelings of attraction derive from the activities that you both participate with each other, from the time, effort, proximity, sharing of secrets, ease of eye contact and the intimacy of touch that you both feel comfortable with each other. The way we reach this plateau is by progressively conditioning the participant to believe that touch etc is acceptable without alerting the agent to our intentions. The way we do this is by using various guises, or excuses for the reason we are interacting with the agent. Common guises to use; 

“Having a convincing reason for their attention, Without looking like a utility thief”



Urgency. You’ve probably had this technique used on you by marketers and advertisers many times, the usual format is “Buy now before you lose this opportunity forever! Once in a lifetime offer.” The way to use this to

lock-in the attention of girls is to state that you urgently need an opinion on something and it’s your sense of urgency that creates the intent for the interaction. 

False time constraint “I’ve got to get back to my friends in a minute.” This gives you an apparent excuse for talking to the girl as if what you have to say is as particular importance that you need to say it even though you’ve got to get back to your friends, while at the same time reassuring her that you’re not ‘hitting on her’.



Intenseness of message. Is it a highly emotional message, is the message delivered loudly and confidently. i.e. You’re really excited and can’t help but talk to everyone.



Sounding like you’ve delivered the message a thousand times. Hence the message isn’t been said just because you fancy her or because you believe she’s particularly special or important.



Displaying a large emotion that reinforces the concept that the message is true. You are genuinely memorized by something, like you might love the sound of your own voice and opinion and you comment on the clothes, environment, people around you.

Once you have used a guise, then you have opened up the conversation and it’s important that you progress through the stages of increasing attraction without alerting attraction, therefore we may use a number of guises during every routine that allows the touch or eye contact to increase as to avoid the girl thinking that we are trying to ‘steal’ her utility her sexuality based upon her physical looks for our own utility rather than creating a situational that is mutually beneficial because you ‘understand each other’ or ‘it just felt right’ because of the

frequency of touch or the intense emotional state perhaps created by a sense of urgency combined with a physical intimacy. There is a lot of information about on the opposing method; the direct approach or natural game, although obviously every author has their own individual input and it may vary from writer to writer it’s the belief of this author that when you announce your attracted to a girl yet she hasn’t significantly invested in you, then she has no barriers to leave your ‘market’ she has nothing stopping her, and therefore she will leave because there will always be other opportunities, you need to appreciate that unlike banks, mobile phone networks, etc where there is more customers than there is producers of the service, in manipulation or pickup there is as many producers of ‘human connection’ as there is customers. This makes it a perfectly competitive market and unless she is locked in (because of significant investment to your market) then she simply is going to leave if you try to imply that your ‘locked into her’ or require any kind of favor or benefit from her ability to produce. Therefore upon approaching a girl, If you go up to a girl. Do not tell her that you like her, do not tell her that she is special. As she will simply turn away and continue her life with all the potential suitors that are already more accessible to her, or happily continue with her career or day to day concerns etc. that already demanding enough as it is. A common way to avoid creating issues of seeming like you’re interested in a girl by walking straight up to her and beginning to talk to her is to talk to people around her who aren’t who your trying to seduce, for example you could talk to her male friends,

or talk to her friend who you don’t find attractive until she comes back to the group, this way you find yourself talking to the girl you think is attractive without looking like your trying to gain her affections. Another method that we will further explain in this section of the book involves guiding her attention onto another matter that allows you to indirectly get her into conversation and for you to progress the conversation through sexual stages without her noticing your intent (because you temporary place your attention onto trivial matters, such as commenting on situational factors, common factors – things you share in common or commonly understood opinions or judgments about the world). When you talk to her, you need to say something as if it’s pressing or important, like your curious about the answer to a question or curious about a commonality to both share in the environment. “What you drinking” , “wow this place is cool”. For the shared commonality, because you merely just commenting on the fact that the venue is so cool, or that dress you were going to buy, or that its really hot, or any other situational factor, it seems like the reason your mentioning or opening the girl is simply to make a comment out of your excitement for your own belief in the fact that your stating, and then expecting comment. Situational openers are your comment on things that are immediately obvious in the environment, for example you might comment on her outfit and say “Hey I was shopping for a friend the other day, and I was thinking about buying that. I think it’s in at the minute, you have pretty good style.”

By doing this you will find that you’re more confident that using scripts or lines because you won’t have to revise and memorize them before you go out to practice the techniques described in this book because you can simply comment on things that you see. “Hey that cocktail looks great, can I try a bit I was thinking about buying it but I didn’t know what it is”. Other examples of situational openers could be “Those boots are awesome…where did you get them?” and “I think this club is amazing.” If an opener fails there is only two reasons why, and both those can be recalibrated out and pushed back into being a successful opener. Reason one, is they will refuse to further escalate the interaction with you if they think you’re trying to get something else out of them, so by appearing like you’re really engaged in what you’re saying makes it more believable that you mean what you say. Another reason would be, the person wasn’t expecting to be spoke to and hasn’t got a unconscious framework on how to respond (you can easily fix this). I would say this technique works 80% of the time, and when it doesn’t its always one of those two reasons, which can easily be turned around because your not actually being rejected as you never said anything that could be dubbed as you ‘trying it on’. And the following techniques demonstrate that your trying to find the answer to a question that you’ve been thinking about. This is referred to as an opinion opener. “Hi I’m a magician, my job is to deceive people, who do you think lies more men or women” This opener is an opinion opener as its asking for the opinion of the girl, because you titled yourself as a magician and stated that it’s your job then this makes it seem as if the reason your talking to her isn’t because

you’re interested in her but instead because you just want to know the answer to the question. By talking about a topic such as ‘who lies more’ rather than ‘doing a magic trick’ this means you don’t’ come across like you’re a dancing monkey who is just trying to perform for the girl to impress her or because you’re getting paid to be there but rather because you think it’s an interesting conversation to talk about with strangers. Hey, I’m a magician, me and my friends were having a conversation, but we need a girls opinion; who do you think is more sexy David Blaine or Derren Brown?” “You have like a really great energy, you seem so happy and smiley, are you having a good day?” “Someone banged my head, does it feel bumped.” “Hey, my friend worries he’s fallen out of love with his girlfriend, me and my friends were wondering? What’s better to be loved and not love them in return or to love someone and they not love you in return? Is it better to chase or be chased?” A common line is to pretend that you know someone, when you don’t really know them. You might say “OMG…You look really familiar…How do I know you? Were you here last week? “ this allows you to gain a moment talking to someone who otherwise you wouldn’t have been able to speak to while not conveying that you at all interested in them sexually. Thereby preventing her discovering her own feelings for you rather than you being focused on expressing your undying affections for her. There needs to always be a reason for speaking to someone, always an excuse for escalation. If you see someone who’s

tanned you might comment and ask whether they’ve been abroad and then mention that you are looking to go travelling. You can’t just simply say “hey nice tan” because then it seems like your merely trying to chat to the person for some other reason i.e. because your attracted to them, not because of the guise. Conversations like this give the girl something to talk about that seems interesting, and they don’t need to struggle about what to talk about next because you’ve set the topic. These conversations tend to last a long time and will allow you to gain more interaction with the girl. The reason I use the line “I’m a magician, who do you think is more sexy, David Blaine or Derren Brown?” as this allows me to mention that I’m a magician, which gives me performer status and thereby disqualifies me as a potential suitor as I’m simply doing my job as a magician and talking to strangers while asking a question that evokes sexual and attraction feelings in the girls as they imagine the qualities of both the magicians mentioned before deciding the answer to my question. It’s easy to think that by talking to someone of the opposite sex that your conveying that you’re interested in them, but this is simply not the case, by focusing on having a reason why your speaking, and speaking with that intent, that you would have if it was your job then you will not come across as sleazy and trying it on, per say.

Physical ways of Introducing yourself 

Shaking hands – squeezing their hand slightly too tight as a joke. You can also ask them if they know any secret handshakes and place your middle finger over their

hand, and tell them that’s the freemason handshake that you saw on a documentary last week. 

Hugging – hugging them after saying something fun, interesting or cool. It should be a really good moment where something fun or cool has just been said or that its just a really positive happy moment for whatever reason or that you are both laughing or crying over something.



Kissing on the cheek – The European Kiss, you can kiss them on both cheeks alternatively in order to discover whether they lean in to kiss you on the lips when you go between them.



Leading them by holding their forearm and pulling them slightly in your direction with them as this can seem that your simply walking or moving somewhere and are thinking about that rather than it being obvious that the only reason your holding her arm is because you want to increase the levels of physical contact to progress the sexual vibe of the interaction.

Physical Routines to use on someone’s hands and forearms. There are a range of routines that involve hands and forearms. That don’t portray your sexual intent, but while increasing the sexual proximity between potential suitors. Hands and forearms, are quite sexual parts of the body and are used in many sexual activities, so by coming into a position where you can comfortably play with the hand of a mate your trying to seduce you can put ideas in their head through subtle pushes, rhythms, movements and pulls of their hands. But before we reach this opportunistic destination we need to create a misdirection that will allow us to gain access to the

ability to play with their hands without making it obvious that we have an ulterior motive or sexual intent. One routine that I use a lot, I actually got from my friend when we were younger. He claimed he had really soft hands, and would have girls feel them. He would moisturize his hands before he went out. I thought his hands were actually quite rough, but without a doubt this routine got him a lot of girls. The modern use of this routine, that I use goes like this; I think you look “21 years old” (guess age) “How old are you?” “Really. Because you’ve got really young/old looking hands, like, the lines are really deep or really smooth. Feel my hands, they are really soft right? (smiles and laughs) these hands have barely worked a day in their life.” There are lots of bits and phrases in this routine that you have to change for every circumstances. I only make the joke about my hands not working a day in their life because that is my persona, your persona doesn’t really have to be of any particular type or genre, you merely have to have something interesting to say. I like this routine because it allows you to build kino escalation such as holding and feeling their hand, and it gets them to feel and touch your hands as a response, thereby creating physical intimacy. Leading them by lightly holding their forearm, perhaps your taking them to the bar or your just travelling from one place to another, while you do this it can be seen as your ‘accidentally’ holding onto their forearm to kind of guide them to where you trying to get to.

Cracking their fingers. For them. I always make a joke that I can only crack parts of my body on my right hand side. And I mention how some people don’t like the sound of people cracking their fingers and about whether it really does give you arthritis. Touch hands “You’ve got really cold hands… maybe you’ve got circulation problems”, “Why are girls always cold, and the guy always warm. You know like when in bed the girl always needs the guys warmth. That’s my warmth!” The testosterone estrogen thing. You compare the length of their ring finger to their middle finger. If their middle finger is a lot longer than their ring finger then they have high estrongen levels and really low testrone levels. I always use this conversation as a spring board Thumby wars. This is a common game that you can easily find description on how to play if your not aware of it. The game usually begins with the line “1, 2, 3, 4, I declare a thumby war” This is where you hold each others hand in a kind of clasp and you play a game where you have to pin each others thumb down, first. Who ever has the strongest and most tactful thumb successesfully captures the thumb of their opponent and wins the game. The Star Trek gesture. How wide can you get your fingers apart between the middle and the ring?. You press each others hand against each other and ask whether they were a gymnast in school or are double jointed because they can get their hands apart really wide. Palm reading – name how many kids they are going to have because of the lines at the side of the hand. Name how many

relationships they are going to have based on how many times their love line has chains in it. Check out a book on palm reading for these features. I wouldn’t personally recommend trying to learn palm reading, its long and complicated and will take months of practice to get any good. Instead I recommend just checking out those two things that I have mentioned here. Talk about their nails, and compare them with yours. Mention they are too long/too short, or the color they have chosen. Talk about whether you should wear black nail vanish Mention the moon thing and say that “the bigger moon you have, the more you kind of feel a connection people but find it hard to express yourself”. “My friend says I have girly muscles… Show me your muscles” (touch their muscle and try and push it down) hmm. Your clearly a girly girl. Comparing size of hands. “Your hands are really girly, my hands could dominate your hands. Are you strong, do you think you could hold my arm down. I wonder if I could hold your hand down”. This routine allows you to briefly almost play fight with each other, and slightly sexually hold each other down in a really subtle way, this allows you to subtly evoke sexual muster under the guise of doing something else ‘i.e. comparing hand size’. Chinese burns/resistence to pain. Pinching pull of the skin. “Do you have stretchy skin?” Pull on it to see who has the most stretchy skin. Check out their small girly muscles. You’ve got a really big muscles for a girl.

“Are you double jointed” (as you grab hold of their hand) and then you try and pull the thumb back and say “you look like your double jointed”. Arm wrestling. Guess when it gets upto the point on your forearm. With your eyes closed but they always guess to early. Blind mouse, dumb mouse, deaf mouse and you have to call stop. Who’s hands are the softest hands. “Feel my hands, they’ve barely worked a day in their life. Some guys have like builders hands; I once had a job in a bank once, for three weeks then I quit”. During the card trick ‘Two card Monte’ Which is where you simply do a double lift and these causes a card to magically transform in their hand from one card to another card. You can have them press down on your hand that is holding out the card that they had previously seen. As they press down on that card it magically changes into another card by the time that they life their hand.

Face routines. You’ve got dimples, then you touch their dimples. “Look at your dimples, they are kind of cute like a baby”, “They make you look really young and fresh faced”. You’ve got freckles, then you touch their freckles. Make a comment about the freckles “Check out the freckles”, “your freckles are cute, but I thought only ginger people got them”.

Let me check out your ear rings, and then you hold onto their ear. I think my ex girlfriend has them. What’s that perfume your wearing, sniff and touch their neck. I think my sister has that perfume. You’ve got a great smile, but Apparently you can only tell if a smile is genuine by covering up their eyes. You’ve got like this little chin dimple. And then you touch it. “This guy bumped into me with his fist, really hard. I felt like I’d been hit, feel it, it’s a bump right?” (get them to touch my forehead)…. Hmmm, (pause) “maybe foreheads are supposed to be that bumpy” (start feeling their forehead). You’ve got baby cheeks, “Grab hold of their cheeks” (laugh). Guess their age “You look 23” What you can do to make it fun is either guess a lot younger or older than they really are, using your excuse for them having no wrinkles, or the odd wrinkle as a reason why. “But you don’t have any wrinkles… wait let me check”.. typically when I go to touch their face they might frown, then I say “Don’t frown it doesn’t help”. Hair routines. There needs to be routines in order to touch a girl’s hair without conveying that she’s amazing and you need her. Because the moment you touch a girls hair or back of their head, it implies very sexual activities. Therefore it’s really important to find ways to hold the back of her head using her hair etc. without letting her know you’re interested. You can play with their hair through the exploration of “What would your hair look like if it was up.” Grab their hair and pull it up. “hmm you look kind of like a librarian”.

Hey I need an opinon on something “I’ve just dyed my hair, (or am about to) what color do you think would look best, like what color would you say it is now… hmm because I was thinking about maybe going your color, haha but I didn’t want to look ‘too dark’ (or ‘too blonde), (play with your hair kinda indicating them to touch it also) what do you think about the cut?” “OMG I can’t believe you just did that, that was the silliest (face or thing to say) are you sure your not blonde? (Grab hold of hair and begin investigating her roots.) Or if they are blonde you can say “No wonder your blonde” and then investigate whether they are naturally blonde. Or “your far too intelligent to be naturally blonde” and start playing with their hair and investigating their roots. A lot of girls and guys will go up to each other and just ruffle up each others hair as a kind of joke. As much as this might piss each other off that’s not the reason that they did it, what they were doing is try to jump to that level of kino escalation without going through the earlier stages. Therefore ‘ruffling’ with peoples hair as a joke is more acceptable later on into the kino escalation progression. “Hey check this out”, “I’ve been learning to do a French play. I learnt how to French platt” (start playing with their hair) it doesn’t matter if you really can do a French platt or not, because if you can’t you can get them to teach you how, and if you can then you’ve successfully done something cool to their hair. You’ve got a bit of thread in your hair (Palm a piece of thread and take that hand to their head… pull the thread from their hair) “hmm let me have a look” (continue looking for more).

Lip routines You do really pouty lips. (point to their lips) then point to your own lips. “ I can’t pout like you can”. I love your lipstick color. It’s kind of cool. My best friend wears that color all the time. Your teeth are really straight, did you have braces as a kid ( nearly Touch their lips as you explain). You’ve got a little something in your teeth. (self point to your own teeth as you smile). I think you better get that out, (move your hand towards their lips as If your moving to help them) I would help but I think that would be gross. Claim you can read minds, and ask her to think of a word, And you will read which word it is. Point at her lips claiming that she’s making the sound of the word when she thinks about it. Lean in really close as if your doing that to think about how your own lips are moving to compare, and work out what word she is thinking about. Get in close, reduce the distance between your faces as if you need to be close to her lips in order to read the ideomotor ‘lip reading’ sound that they are making. Take a random guess as to what word you think it is. And if you guess wrong who cares. If you want to really read minds, I recommend you read a book on magic or use the hypnotic techniques throughout this book to convince them that they were thinking of the word you announce. Do you know that whibble sound that you can make with babies lips. (play with their lips) does the baby make the sound or does the lips do it. Its like when you talk into a fan, is it the fan that makes the funny voice or is it you putting it on.

The forehead kiss thing. Typically after giving a hug or a really emotional moment, it suddenly becomes acceptable to kiss a girl on the forehead to slightly mock her. You can kiss her and say “aww such a baby”. Or if you slightly hurt her, or accidentally bash her head you can kiss her on the forehead to make her feel better as a joke.

Tongue routines Does your tongue curl up round the edges, you know how some people can make that roll with their tongue, I find it really weird. How long is your tongue? Can you touch your noise with it? your tongue is really skinny, mine is really thick Eye contact routines. There needs to be guises in order to get away with talking to a guy or girl and looking them straight in the eye. I may tend to joke that I can hypnotize someone if I look them straight in the eyes. You’ve got big eyes. My eyes are really small. By using the guise of ‘eye size comparing, you can create eye contact for long enough periods to allow the natural processes of love to come about. Can compare the eyes of a person and talk about how dark or light they are or talk about the color. I tend to mention that in 70 years the only eye color that will exist is brown because it’s the more dominant gene.

Closing This entire book has being essentially focused on how to build the perfect social interaction. However during this chapter we have been discussing a combination of soft compliance and individual routines that you can use to pace and lead their responsiveness, to escalate the fascination from the interaction while testing them in order to know where you at with them. For this reason, closing deserves its own separate section in the book also. Phone Number – How do you get a girls phone number? There is a almost guaranteed technique to get a girls number. If she has briefly displayed some fascination with you, and you have touched her on the forearm then the likelihood of getting her number is apparently 1 in 5. From my personal experience if you state that you have to get back to your friends or leave (A False Time constraint) and have a reason for getting the number “You like coffee because I know this great place” then your 70-80% of the time going to get a girls number. Kiss Closing – How do you get a kiss from a hot girl you’ve just met? I think kiss closing deserves a separate mention when discussing individual routines and approaches to build a sense of you and her intimacy. OK. Firstly, anyone in the world will kiss you! I mean there’s nothing necessary dangerous or wrong about kissing. It’s not particularly pleasurable either. The idea is that it’s a progression that might lead somewhere, and that’s the excitement. I’d like to also point out, that kissing is more intimate that sex. Many people will refuse to kiss during sex with people who they

aren’t having some kind of emotional relationship with, because it feels wrong. So this shows us that kissing is more important than sex but also very achievable providing there is some kind of emotional background. If you’re holding hands, then there’s certain soft compliance tests that you can run in order to check that she’s moving with you to the next stage of the interaction. For example you can tilt your head and see if she tilts her head. You can kiss her on the cheek during a hug then closely move over to kiss the other cheek and see if she leans in. By creating the pressure that you have to leave in a moment will encourage the kiss to happen when otherwise a good moment for it might never have occurred. The false time constraint, by there being pressure of your eventual leave, it pushes the relationship to be built quickly. This might mean that you give the impression that your not going to be there forever. Or that the end of the night is progressing, if you look at people getting together in bars and nightclubs, they either do it at the beginning of the night or towards the ‘gold rush’ at the end. The eye eye lip triangle, by looking at a girl in a certain way where you keep looking at her lips then her eyes, causes a person to naturally mimic that response in return. Babies naturally do this in order to mimic cues from their mothers expression. By keeping your eyes looking big and focusing on the person it will cause this natural urge. Personal Space. By maintaining a distance of roughly half a meter away from someone you will be in their personal space. Sometimes this might be I gently lean my knee against their leg,

or some other apparent accidental form of breaking down the barriers between you too. All the progression of these steps needs to be done under the guise that it’s a complete accident, else it will seem as if the attraction is being forced, or that you are more into her than she is into you and this will make you appear unattractive. Leaning your head to the side. Or catching her lean her head to the side, people do this as a soft compliance test to see if they are with you, or you are with them. It’s a lead to see if you copy. Sometimes I’ve been forced into feeling attracted to someone because they’ve tilted their head to the side while I’m close to them and then I’ve copied them and I’ve found myself wanting to kiss them. The European Kiss. If your not sure if your interaction is leading up to a kiss then it’s a good idea to try some more compliance tests. For example you could hug her and kiss her on the cheek and then more over to the other cheek, if she leans in almost to kiss you as you slowly move from kissing one side of her cheek to the other then this shows that she’s thinking about kissing you. Purse your lips. When you think about how you lips feel. Then suddenly you give off signals that your thinking about your lips, it suddenly makes the girl very conscious about her lips. Presumably we give off ide motor signals that communicates what we are thinking about. And then the other person catches on and feels the same in response (assuming compliance). How to actually get the girl into your bed? I get asked this by a number of guys.

A kiss, in principle, is a deeper emotional exchange lead up, than sex. Both girls and guys often experience sexual want, for reasons other than particularly fancying or feeling emotionally connected to someone. As regular need, like the need to eat, or sleep, or get outside the house or get some rest. If your achieving the levels of emotional binding, associated with kissing a girl, then by progressing the regularity of these kisses, with the escalation of touch. Without breaking the relationship by ejecting from set. Part of escalating from the kiss to sex, is you now both each know that you like each other. This means, that its now safe territory to play hard to get. This might mean that the girl coveys disinterest as a kind of play in order to have you chase her. This building of push and pull, of alternatively chasing and being chased builds the sexual tension further. Causing the emotional bond, that the sex achieves to be more intense. To check that to go from kissing to sex is appropriate you can drop ideas. Like that you should spend some time together, go and eat some food at your place. Or watch a dvd. You also should be progressing the intimacy of the kino esculation so that your touching more than abdomen. For example holding her hair behind her neck etc. Also by this point it shouldn’t just be you who is pushing the progression of touch to intimate parts, she should be pushing her luck with the privacy abuse of the touch also. You need to isolate the agent, so you both by yourself away from prying eyes.

Some books, recommend that you focus on building a lifestyle, where you have a nice place for the girl to come back to. Your prepared and ready so that you know which tubes to take, or how much it costs in the taxi etc. so there are no hiccups when working out how to get back to the safe location. For a lot of guys and girls, you might still live at home with your parents, or have flatmates who often dislike strangers in their house etc. Therefore as annoying as it is, you really should think about how best to have a lifestyle that achieves your ambitions as a young player. Providing you can get a kiss, then all you need to do is overcome the complications and resistance associated with sex. And you will be able to successfully get a girl into your bed. Remember to come up with reasons why; “To watch a DVD”, “Because it saves money on taxi”, “to get some nacho’s with cheese”, remember never mention the real reason ‘that your attracted to her’ always use the misdirection as it clouds over what would be a awkward moment and allows you to progress into the next moment. As a seduction instructor, who grew up in this industry before it took off in popularity in 2005, I tend to see things differently. From growing up with hypnosis; I’m used to things being calibrated, judged, and having a sense when something is going to pull off 100%. In hypnosis, and covert hypnosis we can often have a sense when we have someone complying to our word to the letter, so they do everything exactly how you specify and they almost seem to be copying your every precise movement and gesture that they will follow the next suggestion you give regardless of how silly or unethical it sounds. Of course the routine is only

100% if someone has passed all of the necessary stages with you, and arguably if they have done that then they are likely to close anyway, but by having a routine you avoid any problems, like running out of what to say etc. In this new version of persuasion that I have supplied, you have a very real sense of when someone is complying with you, and what you need to do if someone isn’t there yet!

Philosophical

Put

Down’s,

Flattery,

and

Mocking to gain social steed “People are willing to pay the highest price ‘their personality’ in the pursuit of gaining some of the inspiration that the other person offers.” (Vince Lynch) This section of the book serves a variety of goals; we want to cover how to charm, flatter, gain rapport, tell jokes, and insult people. Therefore this section of the book aims to serve the goals of demonstrating you have a monopoly over social realms that others simply cannot compete with. All social relations, whether its about love, or with strangers involve some form of power. One player usually has the dominance and the other doesn’t. Where you are constantly negotiating resources to get more of what you want, without making other abilities feel undermined. Before I continue onto the following section I need to cover a few things about language and schema activation; According to various writers such as Harris and Monaco (1978) when communication is witnessed; it causes those ideas to be primed or activated in the mind of the listener; that is the listener brings to mind elements of the said story.

People are good at identifying the topic of a conversation, they quickly home in on key words that allow them to understand precisely what is been spoke about and anticipate where the story is going. But there are plenty of examples that show we infer meaning automatically from sentences; For example “The hungry lion caught the gazelle” pragmatically implies that the lion killed the gazelle but does not logically imply it. That is to say, when a listener tries to understand a message; they make inferences about what the speaker means when they hear the communication, this process of schema activation, interpretation of meaning occurs automatically. As covered earlier in the book; we bargain with other persons we meet for economic value – that is to say relationships are formed strategically; where we attempt to form the most valuable relationship that we are allowed to join considering our unique talents are interviewed when attempting to acquire group membership. That is to say; when we meet others; we are demonstrating what certain values and qualities we can add to the group; while at the same time demonstrating respect, and commonality for the group – that we have shared goals and values. The way we previously outlined to resolve this dichotomy; the risk of you been rejected if you appear too socially powerful, but while at the same time needing to demonstrate socially valuable qualities in order to be able to be considered eligible to join the group.

One tactic to resolve this issue of wanting to show desirable traits but without appearing disrespectful or losing rapport with the group was to self-depreciate yourself while showing admirable traits “I’ve made a few movies, but my life lacks something…” as a way of putting yourself down to gain group acceptance, we instead recommended that you use a combination of flattery to the group and the leader while at the same time demonstrating admirable traits. Throughout the following section we will show how to use philosophical put downs and mocking in order to gain social steed. You can have as much of a competitive advantage as you like (more pretty, more funny, more intelligent); but if you’re hookwinked by unscrupous competition then what was it worth. You need a structure and format for displaying your intelligence, using humour and disarming your competition without your audience noticing your attack. It’s important we learn to show our intelligence, to let it shine; but unfortunately this means stepping on others shoe’s; if the person you’re debating with feels as if the exchange isn’t benefiting them i.e. they are achieving no value from your participation within the social group, then they will likely vote for you to be quitted from the group. You being there, talking with complete strangers has to simultaneously benefit the person you’re speaking with and the interests of the wider social group. But equally you being there, being clearly challenging, different, and respectful if done well, will be totally charming, and the group may feel honoured to have won over the presence of such an interesting, intelligent man of the world. The purpose of this section in the book; is within the frame of economic-exchange to defeat opponents who are competing for

leadership within an exchange – this occurs in two scenarios. (i) You are debating with someone in exchange for value; that they want what you have, and you want what they have and you are both willing to share some, but not as much as each other would like. Therefore you go into a debate in of intellect and other means to out-wit each other to get what you want. (ii) The other reason that you argue with someone is because of power, and status, you might want to put yourself up for election as future leadership of the group, because you want the fruits that go along with it, or at least don’t want to forever prevent yourself from being held in anything other than the lower ranks within the social group. Our aim is to acquire all of our partner’s assets while giving up none of our own. And the best players at this game; can be rated and ranked in different ways – this can be referred to as status or popularity; there are lots of different signals of status – money, being a well-rounded individual, popularity, adaptability. But for the sake of a measurement, we could say that the highest ranked individual is the one who receives the most attention amongst peers, when you When you enter a social group with confidence. You might sometimes encounter a situation where the group seems disinterested in the things you say, in your presence as a form of defensive strategy to protect their own position in group. Resistance isn’t as much as an issue as despondence, you cannot work with a individual who is too busy being pre-occupied by other concerns, you can’t have them do anything.

How to spark an intellectual feud "If you don't stand for anything, you for fall for anything" – quote Let’s stop dropping subtle inaudible hints about how unique we are; and wear our competitive advantages on our shoulder. We are afraid to hold strong viewpoints. But yet we simultaneously recognize that those who hold strong viewpoints are seen to be highly attractive individuals. It is our fear from antagonizing others that stops us showing our distinctive traits. The reason we don’t usually hold strong viewpoints – although we nearly all recognize that those with strong viewpoints (distinct opinions) are usually seen to be attractive individuals – is we recognize our own fear of antagonizing others and being rejected by them for having such a distinctive trait. We all have radical opinions; we just don’t recognize them as radical because we rarely take the opportunity to express ourselves. People want us to be challenging, but we don’t enter social groups and say exactly what we feel because we don’t want to be disapproved of, we grow old and we forget what we really think, and so do others. People want to be reminded of their own personal identity, the unique set of beliefs they hold about life, but they don’t have the powers of concentration required to re-assess all their beliefs; so they require their social groups, and life experiences to act as a ‘thinking ground’ to allow them to do this. When I was studying to become a psychotherapist, the reason we had therapy on ourselves, and explored our personality

using the psychotherapeutic and counselling models with a trained therapist was because; our personalities set rules and standards on the world; each of us is completely radical and hold some wild philosophical position that we rarely voice. When speaking to someone, you should speak with them as if you are stripping away the clothing they hide behind, that only you can see their true unique nature; you should aim to make them feel truly special, and respected by devoting your full attention into memorizing, and repeating back their argument; Abraham Lincoln once famously said “one of the greatest abilities you can have is to explain the character of the world in the exact nature that the target sees themselves, by doing this you make your target believe they are far more interesting than they really are. When someone speaks they constantly inadvertently make postulations. All postulations are made for the purpose of logic, except unless in the case of humour – where someone might say something purely for the intent of making people laugh, or perhaps one may purposely say illogical things as to entertain the views of others in a social group, to fit in, or purely just to allow discussion into other more important matters. All logical arguments postulate. They state such things, and assert whether they are true or false. For example; 

"Ankara is the capital of Turkey."



"Humans are the only animals to use language."



"Christopher Columbus was the first European to sail to the New World." Kies, D (1995)

By finding the borders of our experience; gives us power. Breaking boundaries is where the power lies. That’s why a joke

is funny, or having a new experience like riding a roller coaster or jumping out of a plane is exhilarating. If your offering represents enough value beyond the costs that it costs the other participant to interact with you – then the interaction will continue, and perhaps escalate further – but if not the relationship will quickly end or never begin in the first place – as relationships are the pursuit of joint benefit. I know when we are speaking to others we don’t aim to be logically correct; as according to philosophy. But I can give you a reason why its useful to aim to know what position your arguing from – it gives you confidence. If you know why you believe what you believe and the counter arguments to it, then when you meet people – you aren’t scared to voice your opinions because you know regardless of what your opposition says, you can hold your own. Stop there – we have a problem! People don’t care about how ‘right’ you are. You might be perfectly correct about a topic in every sense, and seem knowledgeable to your audience but if you are boring, or insulting (by the sense you seem smarter than their social group) they will want you out. Therefore, we can’t appear smart purely for the sake of being logically correct; when you’re trying to be smart – voicing your thoughts, the subtext of your communication is that your thoughts are more valuable, and that you deserve respect and a leadership position within the social group. In order to make this leadership attempt actually appeal to the audience, we can’t focus only on the truthfulness of our argument, we’ve got to win people over; i.e. we’ve got to be funny, intelligent, understanding, flattering, respecting, respectful, charming, courageous, challenging, innovative.

Before we make an opinion, lets first get the audience on our side; assess who are competition is, gently start mentioning viewpoints and see what happens when it comes to opposition. By stating an initial opinion; or investigating the opinions of your competition – you are coaxing the target to say more information – this can be seen as throwing out the bait. Maybe you ask a question “What do you think about?” or “Do you think that A or B is more important?” Then we can investigate the supporting presuppositions for the targets final belief; - “What evidence do you have for that?”, “When did you start believing in this?” During this state we are data collecting, we are finding out what exceptions they have “Is there an example where what you’re saying isn’t true?” we find examples where they are contradicting themselves. Lastly we exaggerate their argument (Straw man) – This is where we exaggerate their argument, so large that it encapsulates far more general details – it acts as a rule about everything, then we destroy that argument – by showing counter examples – where the general rule is broken.

Logical Fallacies The use of intellect shouldn’t be for the sake of truth, because truth while socializing isn’t the priority, social dominance is; the best strategy is to listen to your audience, ask questions, and let them make their own mistakes. The nature of a charmer is to be charismatic while challenging. In Philosophy, there is a topic called Logical Fallacies; these are simple rules that if broken means someone’s argument isn’t logically sound. They can only defer whether the persons logic

in the argument to come to their final conclusion is logical or illogical, but cannot by themselves determine truth. You must use a great deal of tact and pose when using the logical fallacies to pick apart someone’s arguments – because if the opponent believes you are attempting to defeat them, they might simply resort to aggression or other such villainy in order to refuse your access to the position of leadership. Furthermore If you point out to the audience the philosophical mistakes of their debate the audience will disapprove of your behaviour; because they won’t understand what you mean, and instead will make assumptions as to why you’re doing the activity i.e. to mock people, and therefore out of their own personal fear of becoming mocked they will attempt to through you out of their social circle as a form of protective mechanism. For an argument to be good, all the premises made i.e. the vital points to the argument; must be established and then logically entail the conclusion – the conclusion should be obvious from the previous statements – you will rarely meet anyone who does this; so this makes people easy to mock and belittle and quickly make yourself seem more intelligent than if you so choose to do so. “By a fallacy or sophism – which is commonly understood to be any unsound mode of arguing, which appears to demand us to believe in it, and to answer the question at hand – when actually because of simply logic it is capable of doing so” (S Goodrich, 1919:85) Fallacies are either logical or non-logical. In every fallacy, the conclusion either does, or does not follow from the premises. When the conclusion does not follow from the premises, it is manifest the fault is in the reasoning, and in that alone; a logical

fallacy is a violation of the rules of reasoning which by simple means of the argument makes little sense. There are two types of non-logical argument (fallacy) 1. When the premises are such as out not to have been assumed 2. When the conclusion is not the one required, but irrelevant and proves, instead of the assertion some other proposition resembeling it.

Charm: respect your opponent, while winning an audience This whole process is far more interesting if you carry it out, while smiling, being funny in general, and being socially valuable; respectfully charming your audience, and adding information to the discussion that is new and interesting. The problem is; that the leader of the group; gets nearly all of the benefits, because he is socially in control; and if we don’t push our way into the interaction and directly oppose the leader we will gain nowhere of significant importance. Besides; it’s fun to push some buttons- and by regularly practicing your egotism, will give you confidence, will allow your ego to develop its own character and nature that will become appealing to others with practice. In order to get away with displaying ego in a social group; without self-depreciating your position, is to mildly mock your competitors before they interrupt you. Often it’s easier to simply outsmart their positions and then interject your own opinions into their topic of choice; thereby making you appear more knowledge in their specialist area than they are – implying that your well versed in a huge range of knowledge arena’s.

In order to make this leadership attempt actually appeal to the audience, we can’t focus only on the truthfulness of our argument, we’ve got to win people over; i.e. we’ve got to be funny, intelligent, understanding, flattering, respecting, respectful, charming, courageous, challenging, innovative. Before we make an opinion, lets first get the audience on our side; assess who are competition is, gently start mentioning viewpoints and see what happens when it comes to opposition. In order to debate with a person; they have to let you – people tend not to like being argued with, and if you have no right to be there, then the person your debating with will either just eject you from the group, or resort to dirty tactics such as personal insults, violence etc. By expressing a view, doing something funny, or being physically attractive – we are showing the flare of our ego. When you show your ego, you should be sure that you still are interactive with the group, so be sure to involve people by asking questions “What do you think about?” or if you are not sure they will find it easy to voice views about things, ask them questions that makes it easy for them “What do you think is more important option A or option B?” Then we can investigate the supporting presuppositions for the targets final belief; - “What evidence do you have for that?”, “When did you start believing in this?” During this state we are data collecting, we are finding out what exceptions they have “Is there an example where what you’re saying isn’t true?” we find examples where they are contradicting themselves. Lastly we exaggerate their argument (Straw man) – This is where we exaggerate their argument, so large that it

encapsulates far more general details – it acts as a rule about everything, then we destroy that argument – by showing counter examples – where the general rule is broken. In order to debate with a person; they have to let you – people tend not to like being argued with, and if you have no right to be there, then the person your debating with will either just eject you from the group, or resort to dirty tactics such as personal insults, violence etc. So we must perfect the arts of flattery, respect and charm. By charming our opposition we are afforded the luxury of learning what holds their argument together, their position, and we are afforded the time to disassemble their egotism in front of their group; while appearing charismatic and interesting throughout. To do this; we are going to have to really understand how to gain rapport with people, but more than that – we are not a counsellor, hearing someone’s story; we are meeting someone as an equal commanding respect while learning about them - But specifically learning about their intellectual arguments so we can pick them to pieces. There are a range of dirty tactics you can use to win an argument – the typical method is to exaggerate your opponents claim, to take their proposition beyond its natural limits, giving its meaning to hold as wide a significance as possible, because the more general the statement becomes the more numerous are the objections you can use to contradict it. On the other hand, you must give your arguments the most specific and narrow definition as possible to prevent your opponent from doing the same to you. For example, should he defend suicide, you may at once exclaim, "Why don't you hang yourself?" Should he maintain that Berlin is an unpleasant place to live in, you may

say, "Why don't you leave by the first train?" Some such claptrap is always possible.” (Art-of-controversy: Arthur Schopenhauer) – You can make someone quite ridiculous and feel utterly defeated. However; the best way to use contradictory information to what the speaker has claimed, is to use the information spoke from their very mouth earlier in the discussion. “When your opponent states a claim, you must see if it in some way is inconsistent with the other beliefs to which your opponent has admitted.” This allows you to use a further tactic to confuse your opponent; “having them consider meaningless information as if its relevant to the case” by extending or broadening the context of their proposition, thereby allowing the consideration of various arguments, examples where the argument fails causes a vast amount of information to be considered for your opponent to continue their argument, causing them to forget their original point and make further mistakes. Once we catch someone’s flaws in their argument; then we do a joke or jest with an element of surprise to make their statements sound ridiculous (and hilarious) to your audience. “A jest in itself is a fallacy, it’s a very palatable fallacy i.e. unnoticeable to an audience because it’s funny and they will laugh and fail to consider the silliest of your argument; - A jest is an argument that is likely to resemble a joke which is a calculated attempt to amuse, by exaggerating a point until it sounds ridiculous, in the same manner that a parody does” One of the key ways that others try to outsmart us, is by, not answering the question they were asked, but by answering a similar easier question. When a question is deemed by them too complicated to answer they answer a much simpler unrelated

question; and pose an answer. “This is the essence of intuitive heuristics: when faced with a difficult question, we often answer an easier one instead, usually without noticing the substitution.” (p16, Kannemann; 2011) often listeners will mistakenly believe the answer offered is sufficient for the question posed – however it is rare that this is the case. “If your opponent requires you to admit something from which the point in dispute will immediately follow, you must refuse to do so, in this way you deprive him of his best argument – and prevent the audience (and hopefully the debator) from deducing the possibility that there exists an argument that makes it sound as if you have the potential to be wrong. “(Art-of-controversy: Arthur Schopenhauer) “you must take care not to allow yourself to be misled by contradiction into exaggerating or extending a statement of your own. It will often happen that your opponent will himself directly try to extend your statement further than you meant it; here you must at once stop him, and bring him back to the limits which you set up: "That's what I said, and no more". (Art-ofcontroversy: Arthur Schopenhauer) “A pun, is to mock an argument founded on a palpable equivocation of the middle term; and the rest, in a manner, will be found to correspond to the respective fallacies and to be imitations of a serious argument”. Through meaningful conversation we are prompted to recall past information, or to anticipate what we want to gain or avoid in the future – we use others, and things we find in the environment to bring to mind ideas of decisions to make, and store memories (schemata) in objects, things, scenarios, people around us – we tell ourselves “when I see this person I will

remember to tell them about” this gives us a chronological track over our life, our decisions, a sense of continuity – providing us with greater ease to make decisions and chose the path of highest utility by being able to easily consider all the relevant facts – to anticipate the probability about ‘what is the right thing to do?’ The idea of Freudian transference & projection is when you speak to a person, you are speaking to people they remind you of, and this process can be used to have discussions with people in your life – who might for whatever reason no longer exist in your field of communication. It’s a safe way of discussing issues that might be anxiety provoking if speaking with the person the communication is meant for. As a therapist; you are a foundation that allows a stranger to schematically explore themselves, you can have people explore deep interpersonal feelings about life, rather than chronological information (which lacks huge amounts of unique perspective) – by Learning to get to know people – but strategically – for the purpose of having them explore their esoteric feelings rather than just their life details – can be an extremely powerful tool in having people feel that you know about them. Rapport; refers to guiding horses – more specifically it means to take a horse somewhere you must first align yourself with where the horse is going then slowly encourage it in the direction that you desire. You are dramatically different to other people; and if you mention whatever it is that come into your mind; and it doesn’t reflect what others are thinking then you will be unable to communicate with others. When we are with others, we must readily access the ideas that we signal to one another. This can be quite difficult with people

that you’ve never met before, as you might not be sure exactly what you have in common. Therefore I recommend that you use things that are directly available for them to be understood The rapport model that I built to solve this issue went like the following. I learnt to talk about topics related to the environment I’m in or things that are already primed in the minds of those I wish to communicate and gain rapport with “This bar is nice”, “I really like Mojitos”, “I think your dress is pretty, how would you describe your style?” all these topics are easily comprehensible topics within a bar, whereas on the beach there is other acceptable conversation “The sun is beautiful today” “Hopefully we will catch a suntan”, “I want to go into the ocean” etc. And because I felt unable to explain myself properly to the people who already knew me, I began practicing this model of strangers in the street, bar staff, nightclub staff, and shopkeepers; as I could easily check whether they were in rapport with me and seemed to enjoy my company as a response. It’s very flattering to be listened to; people enjoy having you delve into the deep structure of their language; to uncover their full (linguistical) map of the world Bandler, Richard & John Grinder (1975a) By doing this you will find out a lot about the person. In psychotherapy the way you achieve a detailed understanding of someone’s inner experience; the nature in which they see the world; is through mimicking them, speaking in ways that they understanding i.e. by tracking their argument, the way they speak and the nature of the themes they debate, and then use gentle challenge – where you begin to question and investigate in ways that cause the client to discover things about themselves i.e. exceptions to their arguments, flaws in their arguments that allow them to see the world in a much deeper

sense than through the impressions (normalisations) they had learned to hold. (Noam Chomsky (1965) The model of questioning, that we are going to teach you, isn’t from psychotherapy; although it should be noted that NLP, Gestalt, Freudian, Person-Centred Counselling and more each have their own variations on how to question and challenge someone’s beliefs in order to find more detailed content. For example a psychotherapy client might say “No one likes me” and you as a therapist might say “Surely there must be someone who likes you?” This is where you’ve found an exception to their rule, in order to find more information rather than the gross generalisation that they’ve postulated – allowing you to find out more information. For example a psychotherapy client might say “My wife is always lying to me?” you need to find out exactly what they mean by lying so a therapist might reply “Can you tell me more about the lying?” by using these kind of meta-questions from neuro-linguistic programming and other therapeutic models allows us to discover more information about what others are saying to us, and from this we can either use the content they reveal to us in order to build further rapport i.e. strengthen the relationship between us, or use their information as contradictions or exceptions to the argument they postulate. When conversing with another, you have to let them win occasionally, this gives them confidence in their ability to speak; it allows them to hear their own voice, and feel part of the interaction – Let the other win in the areas it doesn’t matter, let them take the pieces that you don’t care for, in a game of chess you accept that you need to lose at least some pieces, you may as well lose the pieces worth the least value (i.e. the most of), when

your socializing the power will keep changing places, sometimes you come off best, sometimes he comes off best – what’s of greatest importance is that you come across respectable. Constantly remember to pay attention to the facets of your targets character “if you can deliver attention to your preys character, having ones ego receive devotion is a heady experience, if you can deliver this focus on a regular basis you will become a much appreciated source. Your prey will be far more grateful about being praised for their weak points than their strengths. “A champion wrestler does not need to be told what a good athlete he is; he will be infinitely more grateful if you tell him he's smart, or something else he rarely hears.” (p2) if you are going to make complements, make them sound credible else it will sound your mocking your target. People are very easily flattered, for every inch of leadership and dominance you portray you must counteract this advance of your ego by petting the ego of your competition. Remember people are vain, and hearing about how good they look, or how particular their intellect is, citing relevant examples from their arguments, will show that you clearly understand the nature of the person your speaking with, and therefore your complement is a thought through one, and therefore appears sincere. Conversation partners feel flattered when you agree with what they say; but not nearly as much as when you repeat their words back perfectly understood; the best way to achieve this is to simply use the concept of ‘mirroring’ where you literally reflect back the exact words they say, but to be truly good as a counsellor, or conversationalist at parties, you need to memorize the words the speaker uses, and add further insight into what they said when you repeat it back, but without changing the

precise meaning that they meant when they used their original words. Without ambition; what is to be admired? - "Without ambition; what is to be admired?" asked by Machiavelli Niccolo (1497) The first class flatterer, delivers respectable flattery that is said without blushing, good flattery leaves a ripple in the room, all good compliments, toasts, praises, introductions, letters of recommendation, rely on uses of honest, challenge and freshness of insight. “Honest sounding flattery can caress a lover, cover up a gaffe, and muffle aggression” Regier, W. (2007:8). Our vanity requires possession of sense of possession of at least some intellectual powers. We use flattery in order to justify our intelligence as acceptable in a social situation, while we belittle the intelligence of those surround us. In order for us to successfully exert our views on the world, requires us to push through the fluff that others through into our path. The problem is, if you push people out of your way as you attempt to take over their social group; they may get upset Men when they feel threatened, they will quickly resort to using improper arguments, stating things that are silly but look good to an audience in order to make a joke, or fun of you. Men when under attack, tend to speak without thinking, making them appear quick witted, rather than absent minded. We want to become the ultimate conversationalist, we must not allow the interaction to come to the point when your opponent pulls out ‘everything they have’ to kick you out of the social group, you must focus on making everyone feel respected, the environment being fun, but challenging. We cannot survive, without others – this is a fundamental fact of life. We need good

services, companionship, approval, status, information and a whole plethora of things we cannot cover individually in this text, we depend on each other for resources, and we acquire these through trading and exchange. A form of dependency on you; as they don’t know how to solve their deep search for meaning in the world – as they feel they cannot achieve it because despite their specialisms in the fields they’ve become successful in – they feel they are inadequately meeting their core unique self. It always struck me how easy people find it to explore this side to their personality with a therapist – or a strange guy in a night club, but how difficult they seem to find it amongst the noise of day to day living. – Amongst all the noise – while with another person one can find a kind of peace with themselves. Have you ever had that feeling – where you’re truly powerful? That your energy is solid and contained in your mental life – that your attention is exact and precise – and instead of being at your desk writing – your perfectly awake and in a nightclub/bar? Maybe you have? – Well its incredible – everyone is running around with so much noise; they can’t concentrate on anything; not even their own thoughts; and in a half intelligent conversation they can’t handle it – when you feel like this – people are completely attracted to you; you seem like the coolest person ever – so contained. Learning to get to know people; while you’re the calm centre of the world – giving someone your absolute full attention; hopefully should cause them to give you their full attention in return. But remember, don’t bid on the qualities they don’t see as valuable – discover what will make them know they are truly alive, and then use that – be that soul, that spirit that they are

looking for; and hold them – although only briefly else they become accustomed to it Everyone loves a conversationalist, especially women! In the film limitless, the main character Eddie thinks back to his love of a woman called Melissa; he recalls “She’d been so smart, smarter than anyone around her, she loved to provoke people”. Later in the film after he takes a smart drug that seems to make him talk a great deal he comments “I seemed no longer to repel women” the scene shows him surrounded by women, citing Shakespeare, outsmarting financial investors about philosophy quibbles, and dissecting the ambitions of art students, law students, rich socialites and so forth. In the early part of the movie, he uses his new found intelligence just to toy with people and he finds they enjoy it, become attracted to him and so on. On the faux website for the film limitless it states “Rather, NZT works principally by radically increasing your brain’s ability to absorb and process information – including those related to your senses. Some men and women have reported that having heightened sensory abilities – in addition to increased mental capacity – made them both more attractive to a mate and more capable of attracting a mate. (http://theclearpill.com/about.html) from the film limitless (2011) by writers Leslie Dixon, Alan Glynn.

Intellectually disassemble your competition In order to gain the absolute attention of someone, I require a monopoly, that I’m in that much demand at that moment where the person is fascinated by my presence, and listening without thinking about the next thing they are going to say, where their friends are, are hows pretty their hair looks in case other boys are watching them.

There are many more logical fallacies, we just illustrated the above in order to demonstrate the wide types of fallacy that are possible; but that many forms are fallacy are in fact a form of straw man argument. A straw man argument is where To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position. Walton, D. (1996) The most common way that one learns to argue (using the NLP meta model) is someone might state a belief “The British economy isn’t going anywhere, I mean what do we export?” this in essence is a conclusion from a series of premises or points the person requires in order to entail this conclusion; before we can argue with the person, it might be useful to discover how they came to such a conclusion; so discover why they believe it. Another option available to you is the ability to find an exception “What do you make of this, I heard last year the UK’s military exports are continuing to expand, and the UK issued the second greatest number of patents last year compared to any nation?” by pointing out an exception, then you rely on the other person to use the best of their ability to handle the exception; which they will likely find an extremely challenging task. However; the best way to use contradictory information to what the speaker has claimed, is to use the information spoke from their very mouth earlier in the discussion. “When your opponent states a claim, you must see if it in some way is inconsistent with the other beliefs to which your opponent has admitted” There are a range of dirty tactics you can use to win an argument – the typical method is to exaggerate your opponents claim, to

take their proposition beyond its natural limits, giving its meaning to hold as wide a significance as possible, because the more general the statement becomes the more numerous are the objections you can use to contradict it. On the other hand, you must give your arguments the most specific and narrow definition as possible to prevent your opponent from doing the same to you. For example, should he defend suicide, you may at once exclaim, "Why don't you hang yourself?" Should he maintain that Berlin is an unpleasant place to live in, you may say, "Why don't you leave by the first train?" Some such claptrap is always possible.” Arthur Schopenhauer. (2012) You can make someone quite ridiculous and feel utterly defeated. This allows you to use a further tactic to confuse your opponent; “having them consider meaningless information as if its relevant to the case” by extending or broadening the context of their proposition, thereby allowing the consideration of various arguments, examples where the argument fails causes a vast amount of information to be considered for your opponent to continue their argument, causing them to forget their original point and make further mistakes. Once we catch someone’s flaws in their argument; then we do a joke or jest with an element of surprise to make their statements sound ridiculous (and hilarious) to your audience. “A jest in itself is a fallacy, it’s a very palatable fallacy i.e. unnoticeable to an audience because it’s funny and they will laugh and fail to consider the silliest of your argument; - A jest is an argument that is likely to resemble a joke which is a calculated attempt to amuse, by exaggerating a point until it sounds ridiculous, in the same manner that a parody does”

One of the key ways that others try to outsmart us, is by, not answering the question they were asked, but by answering a similar easier question. When a question is deemed by them too complicated to answer they answer a much simpler unrelated question; and pose an answer. “This is the essence of intuitive heuristics: when faced with a difficult question, we often answer an easier one instead, usually without noticing the substitution.” Kahneman, D. (2011) often listeners will mistakenly believe the answer offered is sufficient for the question posed – however it is rare that this is the case. “If your opponent requires you to admit something from which the point in dispute will immediately follow, you must refuse to do so, in this way you deprive him of his best argument – and prevent the audience (and hopefully the debator) from deducing the possibility that there exists an argument that makes it sound as if you have the potential to be wrong…” you must take care not to allow yourself to be misled by contradiction into exaggerating or extending a statement of your own. It will often happen that your opponent will himself directly try to extend your statement further than you meant it; here you must at once stop him, and bring him back to the limits which you set up: "That's what I said, and no more". Arthur Schopenhauer. (2012) A charmer may wait for a mistake; and then make a joke to mock the mistake; or to exaggerate the mistake. Before we continue I must mention that you ought to be careful questioning around a speakers sentence structure. Without a great deal of tact and poise you will be caught, and instead of being treated as an intelligent opponent in a debate, you will just cause the speaker to close off their communication preventing you from gaining further insight into their beliefs; and you may end up causing the speaker to show forms of aggression, resistant type

behaviour which quickly will mean you might find yourself overwhelmed. Individual advantage – gaining a monopoly in social interactions requires being incredibly adaptive – you must find the normal rituals of cohesion, use of respect, situational politeness and start pushing the boundaries out; using the very brink of what is allowed to progress towards bargaining for the advantages you require to increase your power – our ego, and unique capacities need to used constructively displaying adaptive traits to understand, address, and offer solutions for the goals of the group and its members; while bargaining for one’s selfish desires. Ok; I know what you’re thinking – you get it, you get that you need to be impressive – right? That makes sense; but how do you keep it; I mean the idea is to get people into the palm of our hands and do something with it? Relations of power create dependence – where the actors become mutually dependent on you; this inequality in power distribution; allows the “costs that person A can impose on person B” –these costs might just be the level of attention you impose and the commitment you except to focus on the ideas you present. Remember in escalation of commitment theory – that if someone is gradually increasing the amount of expense; the cost; the investment they put into a project they are more inclined to invest further than they are to quit the project entirely – even if it looks like the project will fail. This means; B will be unable to consider the alternative opportunities available to him or her simply because their opportunity cost considering the level of investment in this relationship makes it impossible to leave – not only that but our

aim as a Charming Gentlemen is to deliver actual value; to be beneficial to others but while doing so imposing a high cost; through this we gain our advantages – friendship, political support, etc. Linda, M (1981) One of the advantages in gaining control of resources that B has access to; is that you may be able to gain hold of their external values in addition to the values that they hold internally; for example you may be able to gain access to their friendship groups, perhaps their Facebook social networks for the purpose of advertisement of your products; and other things such as being able to target and identify their resourceful friends and then re-focus your attack onto those and their networks. Interactions go through different stages of monopoly; sometimes you might be an extremely intelligent developed individual in one particular specialism of conversation or interaction, but completely lacking in another field, so the interaction will swing between one holding the power, then to the other person holding the power; where each person in the exchange is gaining some form of benefit through the exchange. Our life choices are adaptive, they can be changed. It is for this reason that psychotherapists & counsellors exist. We build the world around ourselves using the opportunities we have, to spontaneously cue and trigger the thoughts & attitudes and lifestyle we create. Through meaningful conversation we are prompted to recall past information, or to anticipate what we want to gain or avoid in the future – we use others, and things we find in the environment to bring to mind ideas of decisions to make, and store memories (schemata) in objects, things, scenarios, people around us – we tell ourselves “when I see this person I will

remember to tell them about” this gives us a chronological track over our life, our decisions, a sense of continuity – providing us with greater ease to make decisions and chose the path of highest utility by being able to easily consider all the relevant facts – to anticipate the probability about ‘what is the right thing to do?’ "God has planted in a man a sense of ambition, and a satisfaction arising from the contemplation of his excelling his fellows in something deemed valuable amongst them. It is this passion that drives men to all the ways we see in use of signalizing themselves, and that tends to make whatever excites in a man the idea of this distinction so very pleasant." Edmund Burke (1757:68) Once the person discovers that the world is much more detailed and amazing than their original summaries that they held before they entered therapy “I’m unlucky”, “No one likes me”, “I’m afraid he will come to get me”. Then they can realize their own core personality, sense of self, or goals underneath, the poorlywritten-map-of-the-world that they had – and see their unique advantages for what they really are in light of the genuine opportunities they are faced with – and in this sense, the personality can become integrated once more by noticing its own complexity, without over-generalisation, and meaningless summary of unrelated life events, attitudes, and belief about them.

Social Exchange In economics, when two people are exchanging goods it’s called – Comparative Advantage – that people specialize in a particular type of talent, in order to exchange value with others. In order to demonstrate this; suppose everyone in the world was equally as

good as each other at everything – then why would you need a mechanic to fix your car, a builder to build your house etc. We build our relationships in order to make more than we spend - i.e. to become better people; funnier, more pretty, more intelligent and all the niche of qualities associated in those categories. If your offering represents enough value beyond the costs that it costs the other participant to interact with you – then the interaction will continue, and perhaps escalate further – but if not the relationship will quickly end or never begin in the first place – as relationships are the pursuit of joint benefit. In order to gain the absolute attention of someone, I require a monopoly, that I’m in demand at that moment, the person is fascinated by my presence, and listening, without thinking about the next thing they are going to say, where their friends are, are how pretty their hair looks in case other boys are watching them. In philosophic debate there are various forms of logical fallacy; to list a few Ad Hominem – This is where you attack the person rather than their argument “Well, you’re a dishonest person so nothing you say is true”, “Look at the way your dressed, I can’t take you seriously”, “Scott is a Jerk” is not a fallacy by itself but the reason one might mention “Scott is a jerk” is to discredit Scott’s argument, therefore the argument really is “Scott is a jerk, therefore he is wrong”. Ad Ignorantiam – This is an argument that states a belief is true because you cannot prove that it’s not true. For example one

might say “That because we can’t ever prove God doesn’t exist, that therefore its likely he does” Argument from final consequences – this is a reversal of cause of effect; thereby claiming the result is because of the cause, for example; the universe contains beings who are intelligent, these were caused by a specific setup of the universe, therefore human beings were designed by someone intelligent. Whereas it might just be that we happen to exist, why it has to be that it was planned. For example, you might say to yourself while at the casino “If red 17 turns up, I’ll have enough money to go on holiday” and then you go on holiday and say “I wouldn’t be here if red 17 didn’t turn up” this is simply untrue, you have no way of knowing that you wouldn’t have ended up on holiday if red 17 hadn’t turned up. Argument from personal incredulity - if something seems complicated, then it’s deemed to be too complex, confusing and therefore wrong; but there are numerous examples where this isn’t the case. People often believe what’s obvious or simple is likely to be true “The simplest solution is often the right one” Occam’s razor; however this just isn’t always true as one thing may be obvious to one person but not at all obvious to another. Begging the question – this is where people wrongly assume, or are biased to induce an answer from the premises in the question alone; for example “Why is he so good at roulette?” response “well, he knows what he’s doing” here the question has been assumed from the information offered in the question alone – no additional premises have been added before the conclusion.

Confusing Association with Causation – “his fallacy is often used to give a statistical correlation a causal interpretation, For example, during the 1990’s both religious attendance and illegal drug use have been on the rise, it would be a fallacy to conclude that therefore, religious attendance causes illegal drug use.” However in reality it’s just a mere coincidence that both variables increase at the same time. (Borrowed from the The Sceptics Guide (2012)

Being Respectful ‘I don’t sit down at my desk and think “let’s shock people!” but I might sit down at my desk and think ‘let’s move some boundaries’ - Walter Van Beirendonck People are very easily flattered, for every inch of leadership and dominance you portray you must counteract this advance of your ego by petting the ego of your competition. Remember people are vain, and hearing about how good they look, or how particular their intellect is, citing relevant examples from their arguments, will show that you clearly understand the nature of the person your speaking with, and therefore your complement is a thought through one, and therefore appears sincere. Good flattery; makes people feel special. It requires that we are honest, providing feedback, challenges, compliments etc. But you wouldn’t accept a compliment from someone who doesn’t know you, it must sound deserved. Before you can debate with someone – you have to be their best friend. You need to be able to listen to their argument – ‘in their shoes’ by doing this you will find the chinks in their armour while giving them the attention they required to feel flattered. Rapport; refers to guiding horses – more specifically it means to

take a horse somewhere you must first align yourself with where the horse is going then slowly encourage it in the direction that you desire. You can use the content of what details people tell you in order to build rapport; however - If you sound like your purposely playing a game of either complimenting (paying attention to the ego) of your target or outsmarting (dominating) your target then you will appear calculated, and be judged to be insincere. There’s various areas that you can complement someone on; their intelligence, their looks, their character ‘you’re a good person’, their age ‘you look a lot younger’ – ‘your wise for your age’, how insightful they are ‘your ideas inspire me’, how charming they are ‘you’re like a charming English gent’. By using the tools of flattery you can counteract the balance, or weight in the conversation when your opponents ego looks as if it’s about to feel hurt. I spent a great deal of my teenage and young adult life, thinking, obsessively that I could master some kind of philosophical system that governs all things; I was not successful, in my older age I don’t spend much time thinking at all. I mention this only because; something strange happened when I spent all my time thinking, when it came to having a conversation with other people, they would have no idea what I was speaking about; because they might mention birds, and I would explain ten different things I’ve spent the last few years thinking about in relation to birds, and the person who mentioned the birds would have their schema totally violated to the extent they simply didn’t have a clue what I was saying, and they would laugh. That the way I governed myself in life in respect to the thoughts I had, in contrast to the reality of the discussion seemed at

conflict; causing myself to receive ridicule from my peers. The phenomena that generates ridiculousness is discussed in detail by some researchers into comedy; Francesco Mele states “In dayto-day life it can happen that someone makes people laugh because he/she becomes ridiculous, but without any intention of doing so. We refer to this ridicule situation as “real ridicule”. Cousuns and Shoham (1994) “the person is doubly inadequate: inadequate in being or in doing, and inadequate in presuming and expecting. There is contrast between that which was expected and foreseen (surprise, unexpected) and that which actually happens.” Francesco Mele. (2002) During my study at university to become a therapist; we had to deliver therapy sessions, receive therapy sessions, and have group therapy. During group therapy you are expected to share yourself. And I would constantly hear the room laughing at everything I say, when I wasn’t trying to be funny, I was purposely making an effort ‘to explore myself’ in order to further understand myself, develop self-awareness and become a better therapist for the process. However, I had already had this problem of finding myself incomprehensible for a number of years earlier; so I made an effort to think less often and instead approach life with a little more ‘what you see is what you get’ attitude to ensure that I shared similar schema’s to those I wish to communicate with. I mention this because I see it as a helpful example for those of you reading this who feel they can’t be understood by others and maybe feel like they are currently experiencing a similar problem to what I used to have.

For a number of years I’ve run courses and workshops teaching guys how to speak to girls; nearly all the guys coming to the workshops were from a highly technical specialist profession; and when it came to speaking to guys they didn’t know what to say. I believe this is similar to the experience I had for a number of years; the problem when you don’t think like others is that no one else has any idea how to communicate with you, and you may feel the difficulty in communicating with them. Here is a model for what was occurring; 

The other therapists listening to me bring up a topic area.



The other therapists have a plan for where they expect the conversation to flow (i.e. defined within the associations of the schema)



I’m asked for my opinion on the topic (activates new schema, and conflicts or violates the expected structure of the conversational as defined within the schema associations).



At this point the plan (expected) did not take place.



A forced reinterpretation occurs of the original schema as they are merged.



As a response everyone laughs.

I found this a genuine issue when trying to communicate with people; I didn’t enjoy this because often it meant that I was misunderstood, not listened to and sometimes lonely as a result; As a result I tried to learn to speak in a way that built rapport – that let others easily engage and understand me, rather than feel like everything I said was a surprise. Through having my various problems in my life; likely caused by my dyslexia; its given me the good fortune of allowing me to

think about how to fix social mistakes; that I make, and I see others around me make when trying to communicate with others. In short; it allowed me to learn how to build rapport with strangers as a linguistical format, and when I choose to also have the ability to be funny and tell jokes. The rapport model that I built to solve this issue went like the following. I learnt to talk about topics related to the environment I’m in or things that are already primed in the minds of those I wish to communicate and gain rapport with “This bar is nice”, “I really like Mojitos”, “I think your dress is pretty, how would you describe your style?” all these topics are easily comprehensible topics within a bar, whereas on the beach there is other acceptable conversation “The sun is beautiful today” “Hopefully we will catch a suntan”, “I want to go into the ocean” etc. And because I felt unable to explain myself properly to the people who already knew me, I began practicing this model of strangers in the street, bar staff, nightclub staff, and shopkeepers; as I could easily check whether they were in rapport with me and seemed to enjoy my company as a response. Being in rapport is easier - it reduces life costs; and creates depth of understanding and thus identifies new opportunities - “Much psycholinguistic research suggests that words that are predictable in a sentence context are perceived and processed more rapidly and accurately than the same words when they occur out of context or in incongruent contexts." Kara D. Federmeier (1999:2) That it’s a great deal easier to understand and express yourself when you’re in rapport with your peer. “Message clarity was positively related to perceived source competence, which in turn was positively related to perceived source trustworthiness.

Finally, perceived source trustworthiness was positively related to attitude towards the source” This is the structure of a rapport building schema-eliciting interaction; 

Greeting from communicator



Stranger waits for the expected associative following events from greeting.



Stranger believes that already primed topic X will follow greeting from communicator.



Communicator brings up already primed topic X



Stranger mentions association within topic X I.e. X2



Communicator mentions X2 and then mentions already near-primed association X5

That is to say, in order to communicate well with someone it’s important to know roughly what you can easily explain to them, with some kind of clarity, based on what they already know (what schema’s are currently activated and therefore accessible) it should be pointed out that when a schema isn’t activated, or seems completely unrelated to the scenario one finds themselves within that schema may as well not exist; it is completely inaccessible and therefore forgotten or deleted until its recovered another time. I shall demonstrate the example of making someone’s hand stuck to the table as a hypnosis routine; when I show someone that they should “press your hand on the table” and I instruct them “you can move your hand like this and this” I shake my hand against the table as if there is great pressure and all I can do is shake my hand, I want the participant to mentally rehearse that shaking movement, to activate that schema.

I then tell that “That hand is stuck isn’t it?” which is a question I want the participant to ask themselves and receive the answer from their primed associations that “Yes, despite my attempts to recall how to lift my hand (activating the schema to relax and move my arm up) the only primed schema’s activated are all associated with the hand shaking, or feeling pressure with the table… therefore my hand feels stuck.. I can’t lift it”.

How to make them Laugh By making people laugh; we keep the energy fun. It’s a way of signalling value i.e. innovation of ideas, because when you tell a joke you are literally altering the way people see things. Using humour to enter social groups is a way of being low key – it communicates that your unique that your innovative; but because it creates positive emotion you are not easily assumed to be a threat – you make people enjoy being around you. It impresses those around you makes you appear attractive. However that’s not to say that you won’t be judged to be competition; the amount of funny people I know who have tried to join social groups I’ve been a member of; who have instantly being rejected with people stating such things as “He talks to much”, “She thinks she’s so funny”, “he’s always telling stupid jokes”. If people don’t listen to you, then you can’t get people to focus on the ideas you present. Rapport is as important as humour, and humour is as important as challenging and debating with people – you need the skills to exert yourself on a range of levels as to out-ego your competition while having fun. A great way of intellectually outsmarting someone, involves using humour and after we cover humour in this section we will

cover ways to combine logical argument with wit, smugness, and one-upmanship. The complexities of language; of the mind and so forth can easily be noticed when it comes to analysing the construction of humour. Jokes are as interesting, if not more interesting than the nature of hypnosis when it comes to causing a response in people from communicating ideas to them. We began the book with the “What colour is a cloud, what colour is the moon, what do cows drink?” With the common response being “Milk” which of course is incorrect. In this example; because you’ve been primed to think of White things, then you’re likely to begin to answer the question “what do cows drink?” as a question of colour, so you look for the colour of white in relationship to cows and drinks, and you come to the solution of Milk; which if this inconsistency between ideas namely – milk and water – is realized will result in the subject laughing. That is to say; jokes often have a punch line, they begin with building an idea in your head, and the punch line quickly causes you to realize you misinterpreted the set-up, in light of the punch line, which causes you to reinterpret the meaning of the speech; resulting in laughter – this feeling of energy, challenge, innovation as our ideas change, our neurons match in a combination never met before; gives us a thrust of energy, and this shows through our communication as laughter. Our aim is to turn communicational structures into neat algebraic formulas that we can use to influence our social surroundings. – how people convey ideas; and when an idea is accepted and given focus by a stranger; how ideas are ranked in environments, and which ideas are given priority.

If we want to be able to build lasting impacts; on the psychology of others; then jokes are a good area of research to investigate, as; Jokes tend to be a form of expressing ideas with others, getting people to challenge the way they think about things, communicating status in a group, and reliving group tension. To continue, consider the following; the false statement that “Elvis Presley’s parents wanted him to be a dentist” is mildly funny because the discrepancy between the images of Presley and a dentist is detected automatically. (Kahneman; 2011) Humour is a great example of how we are constantly stimulated by the world; that causes us to bring ideas to the mind automatically. And when ideas are brought to the mind; they can easily be combined with other ideas that have never been considered before – and this can cause us to be entertained or challenged. Jokes tell us something very important about our neurology “To produce humour, an individual needs to mentally process information coming from the environment or from memory, playing with ideas, words, or actions in a creative way, and thereby generating a witty verbal utterance or a comical nonverbal action that is perceived by others to be funny. In the reception of the humour we take in information (something someone says or does, or something we read) through our eyes and ears, process the meaning of this information and appraise it as non-serious, playful and humorous.” P6 (The psychology of humour: an integrative approach by Rod A. Martin) What are the characteristics of a stimulus that cause us to perceive it as funny? In order to discover this we could take the example of the above joke, and use this formula to generate sentences similar in structure.



“Today is such a beautiful day, (pause) everyone looks so sexy… I love it.”



“The house is huge, I feel like, I AM the king of the world.”



This artistic centre is totally awesome, we are like REAL artists!

These jokes (not that they are particularly amazing) I just generated on the fly just now; what is comedy has been under debate for centuries; but “most investigators would agree, however that humor involves an idea, image, text, or event that is in some sense incongruous, odd, unusual, unexpected, surprising or out of the ordinary.” P6 (The psychology of humor: an integrative approach by Rod A. Martin) Most of the jokes that I have just created above; take a scenario that’s easy for people to connect with – because in the above examples I’ve listed traits about the surrounding environment – and therefore is already readily available to the individual – ensuring the set-up of the joke is easily understood. And then I’ve exaggerated the set up beyond its normal boundaries “I.e. just because I’m in an artistic centre doesn’t make me an artist, and what is a real artist?” It’s a silly exaggeration and “Just because I’m in a huge house, doesn’t make me king of the world” such jokes cause people to bring to mind all the ideas about kings of the world, or artists painting pictures and conceive in a scenario where ‘me’ or ‘us’ are those characters together. Arthur Koestler in 1964 said that humour is when; an situation or idea is simultaneously perceived from the perspective of two self-consistent but normally unrelated frames of reference.He continues “ A simple example of this is a pun, in which two

different meanings of a word or phrase are brought together (primed associatively) i.e. two cannibals are eating a clown. One says to the other, “Does this taste funny to you”. According to Koestler this same process underlies all types of humour. P7 (The psychology of humour: an integrative approach by Rod A. Martin) The synergy (innovation) or synergy as two contradictory conceptions of the same subject are held in ones mind at the same time, causes an enjoyable and emotionally arousing experience, causing the pleasurable sensation of having ones thoughts oscilate back and forth between two incompatible interpretations of a concept. (Michael Apter 1982) When a joke has been told before; it loses its value because the neurons (according to connectome theory) would be already connected, therefore the pattern is already established and it no longer requires additional energy to be arranged in order for the combination of ideas to be integrated being as there is no new connection formed, there will be no laughter response. What insights does this give us into our minds? Cognitive psychologists have conducted a great deal of research on the way knowledge and experiences are represented and stored in our minds. Knowledge structures are referred to in psychology as schemas. And when a knowledge structure is activated by some stimuli, it is said to be primed. A schema is a dynamic mental representation that enables of us to build mental models of the world. “They are formed on the basis of past experience with objects, scenes, and consist of a set of (usually unconscious) expectations about what things look like and/or the order in which they occur” (p. 263 The

Psychology of Humor: An Intergrative approach – Rod A. Martin) “Schemas describe the general characteristics of an object or event and contain variables or slots that can assume different values in particular instances. For example, a schema for birds would include variables such as the type of wings, feet, beaks, tails and bodies, which may be instantiated in a number of ways in individual birds. Many different kinds of birds all fit the general schema.” “When we catch a glimpse of a bird, or hear about a bird in a story, the schema for birds is activated, and , unless we are given information to the contrary, we expect this particular bird to conform to the default values.” (p86 The Psychology of Humor: An Intergrative approach – Rod A. Martin) Here are some examples of jokes that are puns; 

Bakers trade bread recipes on a knead to know basis



A pessimist's blood type is b-negative



I used to work in a blanket factory, but it folded



Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

(Jokes from http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/lit_terms/puns.html: Date accessed – 04/01/2012) The punch lines of the above jokes, introduce elements that don’t fit with the original scenario described in the setup. The punchline is not compatible with the schemas activated from the original set up. The punch line causes the listener to backtrack; in order to understand the setup in the new perspective of the punch line.

Jokes tend to rely on subjects in popular interest; for example a political character, racial and gender stereotypes etc. The reason why jokes use these scenarios like the differences between men and women, or the cultural differences between an Irishman, and Englishman and a Scotsman’s is because the stereotypes provide the setup of the joke to be more easily brought to mind, and therefore make the punch line stronger because you have a clearer image in your mind of what’s being described. Using stereotypes allows jokes to become shorter; and therefore more easily told and require less concentration in order to be heard and understood in listeners. The aim of anyone working in communication should be to tell the most detailed idea in the shortest possible way; that way you have more control over what precisely you’re influencing in people, and will be able to influence more people with less effort on both your part in the telling, and their part in being a captive audience.

How to argue using logic This section of the book serves a variety of goals; we want to cover how to charm, flatter, gain rapport, tell jokes, and insult people. Therefore this section of the book aims to serve the goals of demonstrating you have a monopoly over social realms that others simply cannot compete with. As covered earlier in the book; we bargain with other persons we meet for economic value – that is to say relationships are formed strategically; where we attempt to form the most valuable relationship that we are allowed to join considering our unique talents are interviewed when attempting to acquire group membership.

It’s important we learn to show our intelligence, to let it shine; but unfortunately this means stepping on others shoe’s; if the person you’re debating with feels as if the exchange isn’t benefiting them i.e. they are achieving no value from your participation within the social group, then they will likely vote for you to be quitted from the group. You being there, talking with complete strangers has to simultaneously benefit the person you’re speaking with and the interests of the wider social group. But equally you being there, being clearly challenging, different, and respectful if done well, will be totally charming, and the group may feel honoured to have won over the presence of such an interesting, intelligent man of the world. Many of us doubt that we actually have strong opinions; we are so used to following other peoples rules – that we forget what makes us unique – all of us have a philosopher under our skin. We are each the owner of radical views – that are the result of our unique set of experiences; they are valuable and should be shared. If we struggle to recognize our own views about life; then start investigating the differences between yourself and others – do this by getting to know others – question what they mean when they make statements. When someone speaks they constantly inadvertently make postulations. All postulations are made for the purpose of logic, except unless in the case of humour – where someone might say something purely for the intent of making people laugh, or perhaps one may purposely say illogical things as to entertain the views of others in a social group, to fit in, or purely just to allow discussion into other more important matters.

All logical arguments postulate. They state such things, and assert whether they are true or false. For example consider the following views; "Ankara is the capital of Turkey.", "Humans are the only animals to use language.", "Christopher Columbus was the first European to sail to the New World."(http://papyr.com/hypertextbooks/comp1/logic.htm) By finding the borders of our experience; the differences in views between ourselves and others - gives us psychological power. It gives our ego a voice. Breaking boundaries – exploring the thoughts we haven’t thought about in years, developing a strong argument – is is where the power lies. The more you learn what you think about yourself, and about others the more charismatic you’ll become. Directly exploring and challenging others is important to human innovation, to creativity, and gives light to our identity – it makes us feel as if our life means something. That’s why a joke is funny, or having a new experience like riding a roller coaster or jumping out of a plane is exhilarating – because it’s a challenge. By stating an initial opinion; or investigating the opinions of your competition – you are coaxing the target to say more information – this can be seen as throwing out the bait. Maybe you ask a question “What do you think about?” or “Do you think that A or B is more important?” I know when we are speaking to others we don’t aim to be logically correct; as according to philosophy. But I can give you a reason why its useful to aim to know what position your arguing from – it gives you confidence. If you know why you believe what you believe and the counter arguments to it, then when you meet people – you aren’t scared to voice your opinions

because you know regardless of what your opposition says, you can hold your own. Stop there – we have a problem! People don’t care about how ‘right’ you are. You might be perfectly correct about a topic in every sense, and seem knowledgeable to your audience but if you are boring, or insulting (by the sense you seem smarter than their social group) they will want you out. Therefore, we can’t appear smart purely for the sake of being logically correct; when you’re trying to be smart – voicing your thoughts, the subtext of your communication is that your thoughts are more valuable, and that you deserve respect and a leadership position within the social group. In order to make this leadership attempt actually appeal to the audience, we can’t focus only on the truthfulness of our argument, we’ve got to win people over; i.e. we’ve got to be funny, intelligent, understanding, flattering, respecting, respectful, charming, courageous, challenging, innovative. Before we make an opinion, lets first get the audience on our side; assess who are competition is, gently start mentioning viewpoints and see what happens when it comes to opposition. The use of intellect shouldn’t be for the sake of truth, because truth while socializing isn’t the priority, social dominance is; the best strategy is to listen to your audience, ask questions, and let them make their own mistakes. The nature of a charmer is to be charismatic while challenging. In Philosophy, there is a topic called Logical Fallacies; these are simple rules that if broken means someone’s argument isn’t logically sound. They can only defer whether the persons logic in the argument to come to their final conclusion is logical or

illogical, but cannot by themselves determine truth. You must use a great deal of tact and pose when using the logical fallacies to pick apart someone’s arguments – because if the opponent believes you are attempting to defeat them, they might simply resort to aggression or other such villainy in order to refuse your access to the position of leadership. Furthermore If you point out to the audience the philosophical mistakes of their debate the audience will disapprove of your behaviour; because they won’t understand what you mean, and instead will make assumptions as to why you’re doing the activity i.e. to mock people, and therefore out of their own personal fear of becoming mocked they will attempt to through you out of their social circle as a form of protective mechanism. There are many more logical fallacies, we just illustrated the above in order to demonstrate the wide types of fallacy that are possible; but that many forms are fallacy are in fact a form of straw man argument. A straw man argument is where To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position [wiki: straw man argument ] The most common way that one learns to argue (using the NLP meta model) is someone might state a belief “The British economy isn’t going anywhere, I mean what do we export?” this in essence is a conclusion from a series of premises or points the person requires in order to entail this conclusion; before we can argue with the person, it might be useful to discover how they came to such a conclusion; so discover why they believe it.

Another option available to you is the ability to find an exception “What do you make of this, I heard last year the UK’s military exports are continuing to expand, and the UK issued the second greatest number of patents last year compared to any nation?” by pointing out an exception, then you rely on the other person to use the best of their ability to handle the exception; which they will likely find an extremely challenging task.

Thoughts about competition When we interact with others – it’s important we understand the thoughts of the person we are dealing with. This section of the book is dedicated to the part of others that thinks about the scenario, the interaction, goals, costs, the most efficient route, and forms impressions about themselves. We rarely get to share and reflect on our views about the world with others – so when we do it is a rewarding experience. Our sense of self is reflected upon in our conscious system – our reflective self. The part of us that has a working memory, to consider various points of interest, to bring processes that are occurring within the surroundings of our awareness and bring them to focus, “The term ‘reflection’ is taken from the British philosopher, John Locke, who suggested that our knowledge originates from two sources, experience and reflection. That is to say; reflection is the active thinking, comparing, and judging of the functions of the mind – it’s our ability to plan, create images, organise, elaborate, and rehearse. In other words it is active thinking, rather than passive; for example around me right now is a wide range of stimulus, without a doubt those stimulus are activating mental schemas,

or the case of me writing my book (noise) somewhere in my mind; priming schema’s to mind and such like. However, my ability to look at these passive activations, and consider them, compare them, debate them in an active way is my sense of consciousness – my ability to reflect upon the world. This reflection provides a record, an interpretation and commentary of sensory events. It allows me to cronologue the internally generated fantasies in my visual system in my brain, my ability to dream of images even while writing this sentence; and attempt to control which primed network of associations I give priority, (attention). [p86 http://memlab0.eng.yale.edu/PDFs/1983_Johnson_MEM.pdf] According to connectome theory; when a piano key is played through a speaker, and a very proficient piano player is sitting at a piano, they will have a desire to play the sequence of notes following the initial note played through the speaker. That the sound that was played, triggered a variety of associations in their brain, that are all wired together, most notably in this case is that the original input sound of the note, triggers the next note to be played which is connected by electrical impulse from neuron to neuron. That our neurons rewire to make these patterns in the brain as we learn and grow and react to patterns in the world. The patterns in the world and in the brain, and inputted in sensory channels Acoustic, Visual, Kinaesthetic, etc. stored in the connect-o-some and triggered when an electrical impulse enters that field of information – in the connect-o-some; when then causes either (in this case) the sound to be played in the minds-

ear (the part of the mind that can play sounds to itself) i.e. the song will be played in the mind automatically after hearing the initial note, or it might be the muscular memory i.e. the neurons connected to the impression of the sound in the connectome will automatically send a signal for the fingers to press down on the appropriate notes on the piano and this may occur without the impression of having any choice other than to play the note i.e. it happened without ‘free will’. [wiki: connectome] The activity in our brains is vastly more complex than the feeling we usually have of being a mind. I remember when I was young, and I stumbled across psychology; truthfully I didn’t realize that my mind was so detailed, that I was more than my thoughts about myself. As an author, I don’t know what you know about your mind; what it feels like for you to interact with yourself. But I know for me, because I’m aware of the process that thoughts grow and fall, I don’t really expect to be in control of my thoughts, I guess my mind feels like waves of feelings; thoughts about those feelings all caused by some external trigger that reminded me of something – and this process of thoughts coming about; well doesn’t feel completely outside my awareness – of course it is, I can never understand the complex nature of my thoughts, but at least my knowledge of having little control, gives me some control. People have a very limited capacity to hold information in their mind (working memory) at any given time; you might find yourself having to focus on one task a time in order to complete it, or you may find yourself struggling to drive safely at 100 miles per hour down the motorway when you have music

playing loud, because you find it difficult to concentrate on the two stimulus at once. The founder of psychology, William James; believed that we “can only focus on one thing at a time” although he continued to state that if this one thing “was a collection of things defined within the whole” then of course we could focus on that – this collection of thoughts in a whole about a given topic later became known as a schema. What is a thought? A definition we are going to propose (thus far) is a thought is a cue or prompt to trigger unconscious activity to occur – a thought is the part of us, that reminds ourselves of a memory we have; that recalls, fetches and compares (judges) summarized information about the networks of loosely related data within a schemata; sometimes comparing it with another schemata. In order to achieve this; judging and comparing of the whole or parts of a schemata; or planning for future events; our conscious part must have at least a small capacity to store information for a time, a neural network that can hold data temporally before being cleared for new data or at least the ability to give attention to component parts of the parts of the mind involved in the data considered, and actively issue the networks to receive electrical impulse for at least a short period of time to allow judging, comparison etc. Its widely shown that we have different ways of representation information; that being as we have evolutionary developed in order to live in a sensory world of, 3 dimensional moving pictures, a range of important sounds in terms of pitch, volume, location, and feelings, smells etc. then the brain has developed mechanisms for processing those kind of information, and

recalling those kind of information – probably in almost identical quality. To speak plainly there is a part of your brain that sees movies you see with your eyes, and movies that you see with your ability to recall pictures, and moving 3 dimensional imagery. This allows us the opportunity to represent thoughts to ourselves; simply by “Thinking” consciously, we can activate the pathways to a schemata and then find the visual parts of the schema and then see those and the related triggers automatically activated in our internal cinema – where we watch these movies; we are fortunate that we have this ability; and we can use this function as well as the others as part of the planning, comparison, organising, judging, summarizing sequence. Like we covered earlier we can also play songs, sounds, and the sound of our voice as we simulate speaking to ourselves – but only inside our mind in order to act a dialogue – a narration of the organising of thought – to act as constant reminder what’s just happened, and what to do next when we are performing complex cognitive tasks i.e. an algebra equation. To point out once more; just because you have associations triggered in the back of your brain; does not mean we are conscious of them, but if we give attention to an association, then we can have a thought about that association being present. For example you might see a dog but not think about the dog, when you think “I can a dog” either by giving the dog attention or actually saying those words in your internal dialogue then you are having a thought about having a thought – as we covered its only when the working memory sends electrical impulse to the relevant parts to consider, and compare is these functions possible; but mental life happily continues without these functions most of the time. (See cold executive control)

Tasks such as ‘playing a game of chess’, ‘having an intellectual debate’, ‘writing a thesis’ – involve organising, altering, comparing, contrasting and scheduling of networks of associations – are the tasks associated with active thinking. As mentioned; a common way people use their minds is in planning and scheduling future cognitive work – a scheduling procedure – for example; system 1 might say “When task A completes, consider X representation” then working memory 2 might say“attention paid on X representation” which issues a recall to system 2 “Call primed related value (from associative memory)” then working memory “Merge/Compare X representation with New Primed Recall” which then can be a restored. In this way, cognitive processes can be viewed as a sequence of stable states – different activation patterns in the mind depending on what the cognitive task at the time is given focus. This way of viewing the processing between STM and LTM is classic since the original research hypothesis from Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968); and still remains a central feature of all major theories of information processing. [p1 Ericsson, Anders K.; Kintsch, W. (1995) Reflection processes intergrate and organise (e.g. Mandler, 1967; Tulving 1968) by creating or reactivating relationships between one event and another (e.g. between target items and other information, such as other targets, elements of the experimental context, or episodic events from the subjects life. Johnson, M.K. (1983:86) by reflecting on old and new information we can draw inferences.

Data ends up being processed and organised into such perceptual categories is likely learned from experience; “the perceptual record is important for the storage of complex patterns and producing a sense of familiarity, that is, the sense of having seen something before. Perceptual entities create and are in turn guided by schemas or mental structures. Johnson, M.K. (1983) Let me show you an example of how difficult it is to use your conscious working memory for more than one item at a time, Consider the below mathematical problem. 17 × 24 On this task, Daniel Kahneman states; “You first retrieved from memory the cognitive program for multiplication that you learned in school, then you implemented it. Carrying out the computation was a strain. You felt the burden of holding much material in memory, as you needed to keep track of where you were and of where you were going, while holding on to the intermediate result. The process was mental work: deliberate, effortful, and orderly—a prototype of slow thinking. The computation was not only an event in your mind; your body was also involved. Your muscles tensed up, your blood pressure rose, and your heart rate increased. Someone looking closely at your eyes while you tackled this problem would have seen your pupils dilate. Your pupils contracted back to normal size as soon as you ended your work— when you found the answer (which is 408, by the way) or when you gave up.” (P22 Daniel Kahneman ‘thinking fast and slow) There are various things that occurred when you tried to solve the math problem, you may have first began with a recall of associations, that allow you to make an unconscious guess as to

what the highest estimate of the answer could be, and perhaps estimate a lower potential answer. Then you probably decided whether it’s worth trying to solve it using your working memory. (Considering the substantial effort it will take, and whether you can afford to expend that effort). At this point you begin holding (numerical digits) information in short-term memory, while manipulating the other digits and then holding their answer also in working memory. And having some process in memory rehearsed so that you can recall the process you can to the answer, to thereby check whether your work was a logical process and thus whether your answer is correct. And then you will have your conscious conclusion whether your answer met that rule and therefore conclude “Yes that answer is correct”. When I was young, I saw psychology in the same way I am coming to rediscover psychology despite having years of experience in the meantime; working to promote the dramatic expression and performance of the art of hypnosis. I did this thing, where I would walk into a club, and I would make a big movement, for example wave to someone on the other side of the room, and then check to see who caught me waving, and then assess what it is that the person then decided about me when they saw me. For example; a girl who might be looking to go into the nightclub in order to meet a guy; that might be the reason she is looking; so I would memorize that information and come back to her later to check. Attention isn’t controlled by either system; you are naturally affected to move towards change in the environment, your automatically look at a bright light, or search for the source of a loud noise. If someone said your name at a party suddenly you turn to see where the speaker might be – your attention goes are

directed towards the areas of change; then something else takes your focus and your move your attention onto that source, and the old focus is forgotten. A lot of mental life is just the move between one focus to another with little thought actually taking place about it. Your attention is consumed by interesting things a process of looking out for good opportunities and avoiding threats – these cause you remember previous scenarios, to anticipate and plan your reaction; then you might make thoughts about these associations, and then perhaps recall further associations to contrast with, combine with, etc. we look to understand things that we see in the categories we already have, and we see a rush of energy when we see these rules broken i.e. see a surprising thing. When something surprising happens, we have a choice; to feel scared, or to feel motivated; if your speaking to someone and they don’t seem impressed by your presence, it’s probably because your offering nothing challenging, interesting or unusual; your being plain – people are addicted to change. When we are focused on a certain set of information; we do not have access to recall other information. ``It is a well-known phenomenon that we do not notice anything happening in our surroundings while being absorbed in the inspection of something; focusing our attention on a certain object may happen to such an extent that we cannot perceive other objects placed in the peripheral parts of our visual field, although the light rays they emit arrive completely at the visual sphere of the cerebral cortex.'' Rezso Balint (1907) In an experiment referred to as ‘The Invisible Gorilla’ a short film was created of people passing a basketball between one

another. People were asked to count how many times the ball was passed. They designed the task to be difficult so you would need intense focus to count the number of times the ball was passed. Mid-way through the video a person wearing a gorilla costume walks through the centre of the game. This study has been performed numerous times and about 50% of people don’t notice the Gorilla or anything unusual – their intense focus makes it impossible to recall associations about gorillas etc. The study shows that in order to notice an unexpected stimulus you must have some cognitive conscious capacity available. If you weren’t cognitively focused you would have the attention available to be surprised and then realize it’s a gorilla, and all of the other related schemata. In addition to attention focus that we can give to a specific task, we also have the ability to place attention on the self; to keep track of our behaviour when interacting with others and our environment. For example, someone might say something that makes you feel extremely mad; and you can think of lots of things you want to reply to the person; but you decide to ‘saveface’ and appear polite and reasonable at risk of saying something that might make the situation worse. The feelings and responses that become ready in your impulsive unconscious associative network are often prevented by the attention abilities of your cognition being refocused onto… in this case; your social appearance, or to avoid further distress; so your refocus your efforts onto recalling how to appear socially polite and then carry out those behaviours associated with being good company.

Deception; Detection As we’ve covered, working out what someone is thinking in their executive control is quite simple; people “When making a decision, the goal of any decision maker is to utilize a strategy that will lead to the best results while requiring the least amount of effort.” When people have to lie, often they have to consider a lot of information in order to make up a convincing lie. In order to account for this a lot of liars spend time rehearsing their stories. The thing that can make a liar really good at lying is if they have a well thought out story and an ability to remain completely calm while being questioned. You might think, Polygraphs are those lie detection machines that can accurately show whether someone is lying or not., and sure the military, and police do use these polygraph machines but they don’t use them to detect whether someone is attempting to deceive them directly - they merely use these tests as a prompt as to whether they should let this subject go without further investigation, or follow their hunch and investigate this guy further. Doing this can quickly allow you to get through a large number of suspected subjects, check their story out and see if they were involved in an event in some kind of manner. The lie Detection machine known as the polygraph isn’t actually as effective as the publicly widely believe. The main theory as to why the polygraph could potentially work around the time of its invention. Was that because deception requires a lie involves a deliberate, conscious behaviour, then this effort to hide the lie should provide signals that allow us to detect this unnecessary (‘if telling the truth’) conscious effort. The Polygraph works on this principle.

The main way the polygraph works is by the examiner at the start of the session explaining how effective the machine is at detecting lies, and will attempt to ‘stress’ the subject out, so that the subject becomes increasely reactive to the questioning process, and feels the stress of having to make up answers quickly on the spot, and allows the examiner to have the subject ‘worry’ about whether the machine caught them lying that time round. All the examiner really is, is a clever kind of salesman or hypnotist or has really put the subject into a bit of a situation where they honestly believe they are about to get caught, and therefore are busy worrying about whether they just got caught lying, and thus causes them to sweat more, causes their heart rate to rise etc. When in reality in normal life - telling a lie probably wouldn’t cause those strong physical responses, it’s just the examiner who has suggested those responses occur when the subject lies, and thus causes the subject to deliver those ‘physiological reads’ when lying. The following conditions are necessary for lie detection through physiological means; (‘i.e. through use of a polygraph machine.’) 1.

“The integrator has a reputation for being tough to fool.

2.

The integrator starts out being suspicious

3.

The liar has had little practice and no record of success at lying.

4.

The liar is especially vulnerable to the fear of getting caught

5.

The stakes are high

6.

Both rewards and punishments are at stake; or, if it is only one or the other, punishment is at stake;

7.

The punishment for being caught lying is great, or the punishment for what the lie is about is so great that there is no incentive to confess.

8.

The integrator in no way benefits from the lie. “ (p64, 2009, Paul Ekman, telling lies)

If we are to develop a lie detection approach in Sexual Capitalism, then this certainly seems like a good route for how we can work out when someone is lying, by having them give us a signal or cue when they are lying. Perhaps we can alert the subject we are speaking to that - whenever they lie they tend to look upwards, and then see if the subject makes a special conscious effort to keep their eyes perfectly still when they are answering a question that we presume to be responded to with a lie. However, the detection of deception either by specialist equipment i.e. sophisticated processing coupled cameras to recognize eye dilation, micro-expressions, or polygraphs to detect skin-conductivity due to sweating – increased skin temperature etc. Contary to popular belief; although research has found lying with such facial and bodily cues as increased pupil size and lip pressing little significant research has found any reliable cues of lying in regards to posture (i.e. bodily positioning, i.e. arms crossed etc. or blinking. Most people think that lie detection in day to day life; is easy! That, peoples facial expressions, voice patterns gives away tells that reveals people are lying about relatively day to day mundane things. It’s important here to emphasize that to reveal whether someone is giving misinformation, or avoiding certain topics; is close to impossible; without setting up a particular scenario that structures this game of potential deceit. To detect

lies using physical tells, requires that the participant is apprehensive to the point of stress about you discovering the truth. Even if you could find cues (like stress levels) amongst subjects under criminal investigation that indicate deception; this would still be irrelevant for most of the readers of this book – as we are more interested in uncovering the secrets, of friends, family, partners, and random strangers for the sake of some form of personal satisfaction i.e. as part of a trick, a way of impressing a girl or showing dominance over male competition. And with regards of these type of everyday, inconsequencial truths and lies scholars state that its unlikely to expect any behavioural differences; that marked differences (i.e. stress) are liked to high stakes lies “I didn’t commit the murder” (If he is discovered he will get a life sentence in prison). For this reason, such information cannot be used as evidence to condemn someone in the majority of court houses across the world; as the evidence is deemed unreliable, open to misinterpretation, and can easily be tricked by further-deceptions that a deceiver might employ. Therefore, most interrogations, the sole purpose of the interrogation is to either gain further information that allows for investigory pursuit, or to cross examine another person involved in the case i.e. a witness – thereby discovering an illogical or incoherent story; therefore showing deception behaviour, OR to gain a confession from the participant. It might seem crazy to assume that people would confess to embarrassing, illegal, personal details to an investigatory, especially if there are likely to be dire consequences for you if you happen to confess; however it appears that participants find

it surprisingly difficult to withhold information from a trained investigator. There is not a good psychological or physiological sign or signal that obviously portrays whether lying just by looking at their behaviour. The best way to catch a liar according to Frank,Menasco,O’Sullivan. (2008) is to put the liar in a situation, or answer questions that force them to betray their own lies, by answering with responses or factors surrounding the lie that contradict the story they claim. Being as many people - even those with special training to be able to detect liars, often have a success ratio not much better than chance at guessing who the liar is. Frank,Menasco,O’Sullivan. (2008) tested an hypothesis to see if by just analyzing the elements of the story for their logic conflicts would result in a higher accuracy of correct guesses as to whether a subject interviewed was lying or not, they discovered that this method was far superior at detecting lies, than that of those just using psychological tells. Once I was in a situation where I had no choice but to think carefully about how I answered questions, for me it would usually be a very stressful situation, but I knew it was important so all I told myself is “Vince, just imagine you’re just in a normal business meeting. Be relaxed as possible, focus on making the muscles in your back relaxed and keep your breathing smooth”. The reason I knew that this was the best thing to do was because It’s impossible to think through all of the story in advance of being questioned about it. People simply don’t have the working memory to be able to think through all the different directions an interrogator could take, and develop convincing answers that coherently fit together and deliver your answer quick enough to

look like you didn’t have to think about it, or remember your story. Even though there is no single body language tell that will allow you to recognize whether someone is lying or not, because of the advantage an interrogator has, it makes it almost impossible to lie convincingly, because the interviewed subject needs to not only consider what the interrogator is likely to say next and prep their answer, but also they need to look as if they aren’t thinking about anything in particular, and that answering these questions doesn’t take a significant mental effort. It’s very difficult to hide the fact that you are making a mental effort - when people are making a mental effort their eyes tend to dilate up to a certain point, and then it reaches a level where the subject simply can’t cope with the amount of data it’s got to consider and the working memory goes into a shut down and stops considering all the information. Remember, the brain only has so much glucose immediately available to metabolize. Unless your in a life threatening situation your probably not going to pull out all of the guns and start breaking down all the necessary vitamins, hormones, glucose needed in order to be able to process all the information needed at the time in order to get yourself out of a situation which for a 21st century human life might be a life changing moment if a mistake in the storytelling is made. Unfortunately the brain is hundreds of thousands of years old, it’s therefore hard to hide the fact that you are having to make all these leaps and bonds to make up quick convincing answers with simply not enough computing power. From knowing this, despite there being no psychological pinnoco response that allows us to instantly see ‘oh his nose has grown an inch we can

be sure he is lying’ because no such ‘psychological tell’ exists then we need to rely on our abilites to put the subject in a situation that either causes them to tell the truth. Or use techniques to put the subject into a position where they have to make a mistake in the answers they give, and after they have made that tiny mistake exploit it. Or what you need to do is to put people into a situation where they become higher stressed and unable to make rational decisions about how to answer the questions you offer them. When we hear the word ‘Lying’ we tend to think of ‘Bad people’ and negative things, but plenty of studies have shown that Lying in fact is just a part of everyday life, with most normal people making about 3-4 lies per day. When you hear that number you might think, “oh thats not that many lies per day” but then when you investigate the statistics those lies actually end up being about 25% of the conversations that the person engaged in, in that single day contained lies. This means that actually a huge amount of the conversations people are having contain lies within them. “People lie most frequently about their feelings, their preferences, and their attitudes and opinions. Less often, they lie about their actions, plans, and whereabouts. Lies about achievements and failures are also commonplace. Occasionally, people tell lies in pursuit of material gain, personal convenience, or escape from punishment. Much more commonly, however, the rewards that liars seek are psychological ones. They lie to make themselves appear more sophisticated or more virtuous than they think their true characteristics warrant, and Sometimes, you can tell when someone's lying, but other times it may not be so easy.” DePaulo, Miller (2004)

In other words there are plenty of circumstances where people actively try to deceive us; from knowing what they are thinking of. In order for deception behaviour to occur; firstly someone must be thinking of something you want to know (so you need to implant that idea into their head; prime) and secondly there must be a conflict, a reason that you simply cannot know any more about whether the schema is or isn’t activated in their long term memory. In other words, for someone to need to lie, they must firstly believe that your wanting to know a piece of information and are purposely distracting you from knowing the answer. They might throw you a red herring, something you can think of instead of hearing the answer directly. Or they might answer your question straight on with some answer that is either coherent with the information you have, or is inconsistent with the information you already have about the case. One strategy that they use in the police is to have one cop that is on your side, and another cop that is working against you. The reason they do this is because the nice cop can tell you that, “look this case isn’t really about you, we are trying to catch the bigger fish, we just need to know the honest answer for just this one question in order so we can deal with this enquiry further, can you do that favour for me?” So the Good cop has gone in there and offered you the chance to get out of the investigation providing that you just answer one question honestly, now what he is going to do is try and find part of your story where he knows it will conflict with every excuse you could possibly make, he wants you to answer just that one part truthfully so it voids the rest of your excuses which he hasn’t heard yet - as you haven’t been put in the

awkward position of having to justify and explain yourself so far, you're still in the position where you - look like you're going to walk out of here completely safe and the same as before you walked in. What the bad cop does is scare you, they try and hard sell you. “Look, your going to get a huge fine for this sort of thing. I would let you off, but it’s not my decision the judge is a really nasty son of a gun and he is pretty hard on this type of offense.” the Job of this police officer is to hear all your excuses, to get the false story that your going to feed him and investigate it and find its flaws, either by investigating it in this conversation or investigating it by doing some internet searches, some CCTV lookups, maybe pop a phone call into some kind of government department with more information about a certain type of information. Sometimes you just flag up on a system, they know you’ve done something but they don’t know what - they wouldn’t usually care about this ‘flag’ but now they are investigating you for something else and they are a little hot on your case then its a good reason just to probe you further. Because there is no definite way of spotting a lie with psychology alone – by getting a read or tell from a subject then the main focus in – lie detection – more focuses on creating a provoking situation – that scares people into confessing, or makes people reactive to a situation that causes them to reveal ‘body language tells’ that they usually wouldn’t reveal. Therefore a large proportion of interrogation; involves creating ‘high stakes’ scenarios; that prone the participant to think of the schema you hope they will confess; while at the same time

placing the emphasis on having the participant have to either ‘hide’ or just ‘admit’ the information. In addition to those that confess, the majority of liars are caught because “They are betrayed by their words because of carelessness. It is not that they couldn’t disguise what they said, or that they tried to and failed, but simply that they neglected to fabricate carefully.” That is, to create Deceptive behaviour requires 'conflict'. For example; in one study - to increase motivation for deceptive behavior, participants were told that they were allowed to keep the stolen money in case they could convince the interrogator that they were not guilty. "Human performance regulation involves mechanisms that detect and resolve conflict in information processing . Karim, Schneider, Lotze, et al (2010) We have already briefly covered the behavioural cues; i.e. sweatiness, increased pulse, higher body temperature, anxious behaviours; that are signs of deception. The other category we shall discuss that is more valuable to this working memory section of the book is cognitions associated to memory recall, and thoughts related to those memories. “ The liar must think harder than a truth teller to cover up, create events that have not happened, and will also engage in additional mental effort to come up with the proper phrasing while simultaneously reducing the potential negative emotional reaction of the other. This extra effort tends to manifest itself with longer speech latencies, increased speech disturbances, less plausible content, less verbal and vocal involvement, less talking time, more repeated words and phrases, and so forth”.

The best way I’ve found to detect lies; other than trying to anticipate the working memory-impulsive system operations of an individuals, and check for changes to your expectations is called the Undeutsch hypothesis. It’s a really simple method to grasp in order to discover if someone is lying. This means that experienced events have memory qualities that are apparent upon description that are different from events that have not been experienced. “Events that were not actually experienced feature more ambivalence, have fewer details, a poorer logical structure, less plausibility, more negative statements, and are less embedded in context.” people who are lying tend to be less likely to admit that they “can’t remember the details” they don’t say “oh I explained the story slightly wrong there, what I meant was” as a truth teller, and they tend to speak more negatively about life and events than the truth teller, they also infrequently mention themselves, places, names of things, and other people in their stories. The times I’ve mentally-logged been nearly caught on my own lies has always been on a simple question; I would be on a phone call, perhaps speaking to a girl, or an employer and they would ask “What’s the weather like there?” or they might say “It’s a bad day isn’t it?... “ (In reference to the weather). Let’s take the latter example first, once upon a time I was in school, and I had to call in sick because I was attending a hypnosis & NLP training in Brighton; when I spoke to the teacher on the phone she said “It’s a bad day isn’t it?” referring to the weather, I agreed, even though I was in sunny Brighton some 250 miles away, I couldn’t possibly know what the weather was like in the city my school was from. It turns out that she was using “The Undeutsch hypothesis” on me (she was my philosophy teacher) and using that philosophic method had in one simple swoop successfully

deduced that I was lying using the simple powers of philosophic reasoning. Once I had a girlfriend, but I was secretly in love with another girl; these two girls lived in completely opposite ends of the country, with my home address being a completely different third city. I left my girlfriend’s house and went to see the girl I loved, and my girlfriend called me and asked “Are you home?” to which I replied “Yes” she said “What’s the weather like?” I said “It’s nice yeah, it’s sunny” for all I know she could have easily Googled and checked the weather in my hometown and discovered it was raining, but I wouldn’t know; and therefore I would be caught out as a liar. Lie detection these days, is quite easy; I mean I could check out what someone was saying on so many levels, suppose someone told me that they went and stayed at a hotel, I might ask “Oh, what colour was the carpet” and then I would hear if they had to answer quickly and abruptly, or if they genuinely knew the answer to the question and thought about the answer and I would hopefully hear that in their response. However, let’s suppose that there is no way of me being able to mentally discern whether they are telling the truth about the colour, or not, that I can’t tell whether recalled the colour, or mentally invented a carpet colour. Then the solution is simply; I must research the hotel and find out the carpet colour; with the speed, and density of internet information this is an easy task that should take less than a minute of research; and if you can’t find the carpet colour of the hotel by the pictures on the website, then you need to call up the hotel reception and ask.

“Another way of making an interview situation more challenging is by inviting interviewees to elaborate on what they just have said. This might well be difficult, particularly for liars. Liars might have prepared themselves about what they are going to say, but are unlikely to have prepared the amount of details which are required in extensive elaboration requests.” The researchers explain that when you use this technique of asking the subject to elaborate on what they said they face a difficult situation - where they need to make a choice as to whether they just ‘dig themselves deeper’ and instead of just being able to rely on their pre-prepared excuse story they will have to spontaneously invent new details to add depth to the story. Or they could claim that they don’t actually recall anymore information. Either way its going to look suspicious that they don’t remember anything more - or will force them to make a mistake by having them invent more details to the fabricated story on the fly.

Priming confession This morning while writing this section of my book; I received an email from a potential customer; this customer is female and particularly beautiful; she asked “How can I tell if someone is who they really say they are?” I replied the following; “In short, there is no real way of telling if someone is telling the truth from their behaviour. The only way you would really know if someone wasn’t who they say they are, is if you mentioned a topic outside their ‘character’ but within their knowledge of being someone else. Suppose you’re dealing with a spy; and you suspect that they really studied for a period at another university to what they claim; you might mention how that city is “such a beautiful city” and then mention something

untrue about the city “its centre has the most beautiful square with a statue of the king” if the participant at this point looks confused, or annoyed by what you’re saying, then it’s obvious that they know for a fact that the centre perhaps doesn’t have a square nor a statue of a king, and therefore you know that they spent some time in that city. Therefore they have answered “Out of character” and you now know that they are engaging in deceptive behaviour. I continued with the girl; “Suppose I was going out with you” and “I wanted to know something about you, like a secret, but you couldn’t tell me” I would mention it and see if you react, to check whether you really have a schema that is activated for their ideas. Other than this method, there isn’t a great deal of solutions psychology wise in order to detect if someone is lying. Unless you do something more invasive; for example, Airports put you in a high pressure scenario, making you question whether you’re a bad person, whether someone has tampered with your bag, or maybe you accidentally have touched drugs or have had a gun snuck on your person; and that if they discover that this has occurred, there will be bad consequences; that you should probably just admit everything. They question you with signs; “Do you have a gun?” These prompt you to act scared, and if you act too scared because you are hiding something and now you’re thinking about it, because the idea is elicited. Then you are taken aside to be questioned. Like, a policeman might say, "Do you know what money laundry is" I think they just test people to see whether when you mention money laundry, what happens inside the persons head;

do they have a clear understanding? Will they look confused when you mention it like the textbook way rather than the gangsta way? Because this girl is attractive; I decided to play around a little bit in the email; I said take this for an example; the other day a girl asked me “Can you make me reveal my secrets?” So I asked her “can you think of one secret that you can’t tell me” she said “yes” at this point I know the idea is elicited. So I said "do you know the feeling where you just want to tell someone something, because you can't get it out of your head" she said yes. she changed topic and then she told me her secret minute later. See the majority of investigations; by people who need to know whether someone is lying, don’t rely on behavioural cues, or cognitive inconsistencies, but instead on whether the story is logical, or they focus on having the person confess; and the vast majority of the time; people do confess – even to the gravest, most high stake information. – So that’s really the way you tell whether someone is lying; You just, test their knowledge, and see what quickly is recalled, what schemas remain activated, and what they veto (i.e. try to avoid) I said in the email “Ok, I know you’re wondering, how you can make someone confess, is it really as simple as the example Vince already listed? But truthfully making people do things is really quite easy, it just takes like a question. [I’m fooling around with the girl here because she’s beautiful] "Have you ever sent naked pictures over the internet?"

I say, “it’s a just a question right? That just because I ask if you ever have, doesn’t mean you will want to send me some pictures of yourself right now, right?” But I continue “This wouldn’t be good enough, because you know this is a game, that although you know how to send naked pictures, and I know you’re thinking about potentially doing it, doesn’t mean you’re about to do it. So let’s make this a little more real – with something a little more present and relevant. So I add the line, "You’re very beautiful" – you see with a very simple question followed by a statement, I’ve created a situation that would have never existed before. Following this email, I pasted the script from the (2010) Film about Facebook’s founder Mark Zuckerberg - The Social Network and his legal disputes. In the following scene, a lawyer explains how its so easy to have people consider a bias, an anchor that is completely irrelevant to all the known facts about a case, but can completely skew the way the case is interpreted; and therefore the outcome. For this reason, despite it being clear that he did invent Facebook; she advises he still “pays off” his competition. [SCRIPT] Mark Zuckerberg says “What happens now?” Marylin (Assistant Lawyer)“Sy and the rest of them are at the palm having a steak. Then they'll come back up to the office and start working on a settlement agreement to present to you.” Mark Zuckerberg says; “They want me to settle?” Marylin says “Oh yeah and your going to have to pay them some bonus money too.” Mark Zuckerberg says “Why?” Marylin says “Cause your gonna need these guys to sign a non-disclosure agreement and you're gonna

need to be indemnified. they say one unflattering word about you in public and you own their house, wife and kids.” Mark Zuckerberg says: “I don't see why I have to pay them anything, I invented Facebook.” Marylin says; “I'm talking about what a Jury will see. Thats what I do, Thats what i'm doing here. I'm trying to specialize in voirdire-Jury Selection. Clothes, Hair, Wedding ring, speaking style, likeability.” Mark Zuckerberg; ”I don't see what likability has to do with showing that I invented facebook?” Marylin; “I've been lincensed to practice law for all of 20 months and I could get a Jury to believe you planted the story about Eduardo. You know how? Just by asking the question. Watch. "Why weren't you at the sorority party that night?" Mark Zuckerberg; “You think i'm the one who called the police?” Marylin says “Doesn't matter. I asked the question and now everybody's thinking about it. You lost the jury in the first 10 minutes.” How can you know what someone else is thinking? What you see is what you get: A lot of students of mine, seem to make an effort to guess what others are thinking. Like they somehow assume that people are lying or hiding something when they speak, that they aren’t telling the entire story; I always assume exactly the opposite to this. The moment you stop judging, and guessing what others are thinking, and just assume that people always tell the truth you will be a lot better at guessing what others are thinking. Law of Least Effort: A general “law of least effort” applies itself to cognitive as well as physical exertion. The law asserts that if there are several ways of achieving the same goal, people will eventually gravitate to the least demanding course of action. In the economy of action, effort is a cost, and the acquisition of skill

is driven by the balance of benefits and costs. Laziness is built deep into our nature. Kahneman, D. (2011:37) What’s primed?: “Thoughts last a while” The mental machinery in the brain; stays active for some time after you’ve stopped using it. For example; every time I stop writing this book and look at my Facebook or check my phone, I will think about other things other than writing this book for a considerable amount of time. Activation of mental schema’s lasts about 12 seconds unless reactivated by either habit, or further stimulus causing reactivation. So you can bet that if a girl looks at you from across the room, and then turns back to look at you 15seconds later that it’s likely that she has been thinking about you in her working memory sometime within those 15 seconds. People look where they are thinking: if someone is thinking of work, they are likely looking at the floor, or looking at the clock, or something along those lines. If someone is thinking about friends they are likely looking at people or their phone. People are quite obvious as to what they are thinking as they use the physical world to help them organise their mental thoughts. Because schema-activation is context-dependent; i.e. to think about what work you need to complete for today you might open up your email to see what tasks that offers i.e. a client might have emailed you and therefore you might as a response try to sell him a product, and this will make up a portion of your day. Or it might be that you’re a student, and in order to remind yourself to start an assignment that you open up your word document. People use physical items, as cues for mental reminders to cause system 1 schema’s to be elicited. Eye movements: When someone is using their working memory, they may have visual-preference eye accessing cues. This usually

is a habit from development through the cognitive stages of their early childhood development. This means that they will look up for internal senses of visual information, to the sides of their eyes, or look around from left to right to hear mental noises; and look down to either talk inside their own head, I.e. to use some kind of mental dialogue, or connect with some kind of feeling. However these assumptions I have listed here are not to be trusted; there are various reasons why. For example the very fact that on the whole thoughts that are recalled from system 1 are likely incomplete, they consist of a variety of different associations, with few pictures, sounds, and some kind of overarching feeling in between, rather than these “modalities” sound, emotion, imagery occupying separate thoughts usually such distinctions in thought don’t occur. The only real scientifically statistically significant way to see if any person you experiment on is using their working memory is to measure their pupil dilation. “TOTS and HOTS” We have things we see for example “there is a dog” this is a thought that must be going on somewhere in my brain if a dog is present, but then we have the thought “I am seeing a dog” If I am aware that a dog is in my presence. Therefore the majority of thoughts are simply extra-versions of primed associations that already are activated schema in the impulsive system 1. For most of us most of the time, it seems concurrent possibilityexplicit representations automatically lead to appropriate HOTs. The difficulty of using possibility-explicit representations without HOTs is illustrated by Wegner’s (1994) task of asking people to not think of white bears for a specified time. People find this extraordinarily difficult. In this task, a possibility-

explicit imperative representation is formed by the SAS “Do not produce representations of white bears”. This representation can be used to guide the lower system, and also monitor its success. But if a second order thought is automatically formed “I am intending not to produce representations of white bears”, the HOT about intending makes the content of the possibilityexplicit representation, which includes the concept white bear, the content of a conscious mental state. That is, engaging in the task to not think of white bears, itself leads to the HOT that makes one consciously think of the concept of white bears. It might be objected that the HOT of intending makes one consciously think of the concept of white bears, rather than to consciously think of white bears per se, and it is the latter that is demanded by Wegner’s task. That is, one need not fail the Wegner task simply by virtue of having a HOT of intending.

Working with the activated schemas of others; If we want to know the answer to a simple question with another; for example “Is my lover cheating on me?” This shouldn’t be hard to discern using the information covered in the book. If the “lover” has cheated, then when you ask her about where she was or whether she loves you, her pupils will dilate as she uses her working memory to construct an answer. If someone knows what a cat is, then the moment the word cat is presented then we have no choice but to activate the schemas in our brain associated with cats; this is assuming that the ease of activation for the cat schema is the most frequently repeated, and ease to recall over currently stimulated competition for attention.

Cognitive working memory has ways of organising Impulsive system thoughts. For example it can recall more than one idea at once. Like with the example of The Psychology Humour; that is covered at some point during this book; Some things that working memory can do is “When A occurs do B”. It does this by witnessing “A” occurring naturally in the environment, and then immediately recalls “B” either by using working memory to recall “B” or that “B” was already primed in the impulsive system; this leads to the causal link between “A” and “B” triggering the other; these are called possibility-explicit imperative’s and a representation of this could be the following example “When I finish the next paragraph, I will make some green tea” This sets up the lower system to monitor the activity of completing the paragraph and trigger the getting up to make green tea. . Indeed, seconds later, when one has just finished the paragraph, one might find oneself getting up to make the tea. However, other on-going contention scheduling processes that occur while finishing the paragraph may have in the meantime activated other schemata, so tea making is not initiated. (see Dienes (2006, 8) You can set your memory to search for capital cities that start with N or for French existentialist novels. And when you rent a car at London’s Heathrow Airport, the attendant will probably remind you that “we drive on the left side of the road over here.” In all these cases, you are asked to do something that does not come naturally, and you will find that the consistent maintenance of a set requires continuous exertion of at least some effort.” (Kahneman, 2010)

For example; I’ve noticed that people who park their cars in public car parks. Often don’t remember the exact position of the car, but instead they use cues to find their car. For example you might walk a certain direction “Until I see yellow wall” (impulsive system) when you reach the yellow wall you might not have a casual-impulsive action planned so you ask in your working memory “What now?” and perhaps you decide “Recall what floor level it’s on” you suddenly remember seeing a big “3” when you left the car park; and then suddenly you start walking to your left realizing that you’re on the right floor, and instinctively as part of recalling the “3” you now are walking towards the geometrical position your car is parked on the “3” level. That is to say that “All executive function tasks” are about the organisation, recalling, comparing and contrasting of possibilityexplicit representations in system 1 (the impulsive system). That when one activity occurs it schedules another to be completed, We have a sense of free will partly because we represent that we could have done otherwise#. (Dienes 2008:7) that we have an ability to recall other associations and overtime change the way our impulsive system is setup to function. For example; currently I’m living in Lisbon, Portugal. I don’t speak any Portuguese, but often I’m told that by others that I know what their conversation was about even though they spoke in Portuguese and not in English. I know when someone is ending a conversation by the sounds they make, I don’t know how they are ending the conversation, and I once considered in my working memory several words to say upon departing someone in Portuguese. Now I only recognize the sounds, and sometimes I say the words but without knowing what they

mean, and I see that the person I am saying bye to somehow seems pleased with my words. If contention scheduling were just left to itself, we would be entirely creatures of habit. If we always drive a certain route from home to work, that route is likely to be taken every time if contention scheduling were the only control process at work. But sometimes we can decide to do something new; for example, to make a detour at the traffic lights by turning left rather than right in order to buy milk at the supermarket. This new action requires the SAS (overcoming a strong pre-existing response).

Which Envelope has the money in? How cans a simple psychological trick, provide us details into the complex mental working life of people? I think you know by this point in the book that it can tell us a whole lot. My good friend – and colleague – João Blümel; has for a number of years been performing the following routine (which can be purchased in greater linguistical detail, and different performance style if you contact him) and the first time I saw it my mind was blown; but over the years the routine has showed me more and more how predictable we really are and what we are thinking and why we think it in response to the environmental context that we find ourselves in. He’s how the effect looks to the audience. “I want you to pick one of these two envelopes, one has the money in, and one doesn’t – the one you pick, is the one you get to keep” – a random audience member comes on stages – and picks up any one of the two envelopes, and opens it and inside is a piece of paper that says “NOTHING” – then the audience member is instructed to open the other envelope, and when they open it

they find a large amount of money. The performer says “you could have chosen any envelope to keep, and now you take home the one with nothing”. However; the effect is really quite different to how the audience interpret it. There are two envelopes on the table, with the one with the “nothing” being underneath the one with the money. The performer brings the participant to the table, and doesn’t announce anything about one of the envelopes having money in. he says “which ever envelope you pick, is the one you get to keep” he separates the two envelopes pushing the one with the “nothing” inside towards the participant and then pulls back the one with the money inside. He then says “you might think, that the reason I pushed this envelope forwards is because it’s the one I want you to pick it… but just pick an envelope” and then they nearly always pick up the envelope that was pushed forwards he then says “I’m giving you five seconds to change your mind, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1” and then he reveals that they chose the envelope without the money in. Why does this work? Well, according to what we’ve outlined in the book – when an option is easiest, it’s the option that is primed – in this case it will cost less effort for the person to reach over and grab the envelope with nothing in – However, the problem is that “By picking the easiest envelope, am I being deceived?” that people always have the ability to cancel the ideas that crop up in their mind – however in this case this potential complaint is handled “by me pushing this envelope forwards, you might think that I want you to pick this envelope, but I really don’t mind, the envelope you pick is the one you keep” this means that the subjects potential complaint “I’m being tricked, so I should

choose the other one” is handled, by “I might be tricked, I might not, so, either way it doesn’t matter what I choose.. therefore I should chose the option that is most economical (primed)” – they select the envelope with nothing in. However; I need to repeat something very important once more – If they subject was aware that there was a large quantity of money in one of the envelopes, they might more carefully scrutinize and –not go with – the most primed – most economical choice, instead they might analyse, contemplate lots of potential scenarios; making the weight of the priming that you’ve built easily outweighed by lots of other scenarios activating all types of schema’s and response potentials of picking up any one of the two envelopes – if this happened the probability of them selecting either envelope would be close to 50%; which means you would lose a great deal of money half the time you performed this psychological routine – in our case as professional performers we can’t have that occur and therefore need to be sure to perform this routine and know exactly what our subject is thinking. To summarize; 

People choose what is economical



This is said to be primed



That what is primed is the response potential (RP)



The envelope that is pushed forwards is the one people want to select



However tested people tend to double-check whether they should do their first instinct.



But a simple line such as “You might think I am bluffing you” easily handles this event



By exploring the example of a simple 50:50 choice of which envelope to select – and how the probabilities swing from moment to moment; every time new information is offered or considered by the subject should hopefully show you that even a choice as simple as selecting which envelope is never as simple as 50:50 – and that what you’re thinking at any point during the decision process is perfectly predictable and open to influence.

How to know what number someone is thinking of between 1-10? As covered, it’s very difficult to detect whether someone is lying by physiological means alone (how someone looks, acts etc.) that even those who are highly trained professionals in this field do little better than chance when they can’t control environmental factors. That trained professionals often rely on illogical arguments – to pick apart peoples stories until they can gain a lawful confession out of the individual from pointing out the problems in their story. Physiological cues; will only work on someone who is somewhat cooperative, for various reasons – perhaps because they are stupid, maybe because they want to be caught, they think you’re a genius, or are scared. For this reason detection of lies using physiological cues won’t work when the content of the lie isn’t emotionally-sacred, at risk of being discovered, has dangerous consequences for concealing the information etc. This method of lie-detection also won’t work on psychopaths, or highly intelligent people like college students; for example college students when interrogated by trained interrogators to see if they were lying – the professionals only guessed correctly if they

were lying or telling the truth 53% of the time – little better than chance. Using the method described above about discovering illogical components of someone’s stories – and noticing the lack of descriptive, and emotional quality to someone’s description of a chain of events – I can point out where a story doesn’t make sense, and thereby know to some extent when I am being lied to – but this isn’t a passive approach, I must actively play with someone’s stories in order to decipher this – and to do this in polite conversation – or even part of a magic trick, often seems rude and poor mannered. Sometimes friends will ask me to decipher whether they are lying and I will use the technique listed above. However when it came to simple tricks like “What number between 1-10 am I thinking of” it became a much more complicated matter; as I couldn’t see a discernible way of picking apart their story for something as simple as “What number am I thinking of?” When a magician asks a person what number they are thinking of between one and ten, there’s a variety of psychological things a magician can do to influence their number. The most simple one is when you say “Quickly just think of a number between one and ten?” they go “yes” and if they answered quickly then you assume they went for the easiest number to think of – which is usually seven – at this point you can say “That was the first number you thought of in your head right?” If they agree then you know it’s most likely seven – at which point you make your announcement – the number your thinking of is seven. However there’s another thing you could say if they didn’t agree “You didn’t go for the first number you came up with in your head,

you went for the second” I might continue “because you thought it would be too obvious, and your trying to catch me out” If they agree then it might be that they have gone for something close to the edges of the range for example – nine or one – or something obscure like – four – but never five because its dead central. Other than this, you have no tangible way of knowing the number they are thinking of at this point. You could break it down a further stage – “I’m going to ask you is it ‘X’ number and every time I ask you whether it’s a number, you lie and say – no its not” – then you sequentially count from one to ten saying “is it this number ?” the problem is that this method is no different to the lie detection on college students using only physiological cues – unless the person is scared, emotionally silly, or thinks you’re a genius and is somehow suggested to give you cues – then there isn’t going to be ANY discernible cues. Because, the thing is, the responses would be identical-ish, providing someone doesn't feel an emotional impact or that you can work out there thought. it just sounds like "No the number isn't seven", "No the number isn't six" Well, One idea I had would be "How did you come to decide upon that number?" They might say "oh it was the first number into my head" This wouldn't give me enough information To assess whether they were lying, So I came up with a further question "Is this your favourite number?" It’s likely it’s not their favourite number But the person has a responsibility to lie. So, they should confirm, YES it’s my favourite number. That’s the thing; with certain questions we think that we shouldn't pursue further questions. That it’s rude to, or whatever or that it destroys the game. But, I think destroying 'their game' of hiding secrets from you is the exact method of discovering

their secrets. Because a person who is attempting to hide secrets will unnessarily make up stories, exgerate, and act ‘too convincing’ whereas a person who doesn’t ‘have a favourite number’ or a person who ‘hasn’t fully decided on which number they mentally selected, or the reason for why they selected it’ those people are the ones who are telling the truth - rather than the person who says “yeah I chose this number because it’s my favourite”.

A diary of a stranger I’ve decided that it would be useful to follow the imaginary thoughts of an imaginary stranger. Made up from appearances; I wrote this while on a balcony in a hotel in Tenerife, Playa de Las Americas while watching people chatter and buy drinks around the swimming pool; I have a bird’s eye view of the pool, but cannot see peoples facial expressions or hear any sounds from what they are saying. Two girls are chatting, initially their rapport is weak, and then they are pacing and matching each other. One of them stands up briefly and then sits down. I do not know why this is, but I expect within 2 minutes she will stand up in the exact manner as this and will go somewhere. Being as she keeps doing some kind of dance like movement, I assume it’s something energetic that she is required to go and do, and the ordinal reason she stood was to act as a prompt to remind herself to later stand up in a moment to go complete a task. As the response potential of standing, will be linked to a series of thoughts, that she cannot possibly hold in working memory at the same time as communicating with her friend, so she postpones her future

action, and stands up and sits down again to link the association of the future action with the feeling of standing; so that she can temporarily use her attention to focus on the details that the friend brings into her consciousness during the conversation. One of the girls touches her shorts (she is wearing a bikini beneath them) and then is interrupted by a guy who comes over. I suspect that this is her rehearsing that when the guy leaves she will remove her shorts, in the exact same manner which she has just mentally rehearsed in order to offer her a system 1 impulsive trigger later on. When the guy comes over she turns this hand movement, which was ordinary to remove her shorts, to instead rub her leg. Rubbing her leg, is likely associated with the primed schema’s such as being attracted to the guy; but probably would never have likely occurred if the girls hand wasn’t already in the primed position and her response potential to use that hand wasn’t already activated due to her previous movement. She looks at her friend, (assuming for approval) and perhaps during this moment she asks herself what to make of the situation “Is it awkward?”, “Do you fancy him?” or some question such like that; however it could be that she has no thought at all, and is just trying to re-establish rapport with her friend, either to indicate to the guy that the friends are a team, or to make her friend feel comfortable with the exchange. After this prompt, the friend who isn’t so much in the conversation with the guy, suddenly becomes more animated and swaps words and gestures with the guy, as they try to match each other’s body language, but for whatever reason it seems out of sync and mistimed.

The guy’s energy drops. The girl who was going to stand up automatically; and walks over to the bar, at this point the remaining girls hand touches the cable of her headphones (that aren’t currently in her ears) but then her hand moves away from her headphones and she continues talking to the guy. It’s likely that within the next two minutes she will put her headphones in her ears the moment that either the guy leaves or the friend returns or her hand accidentally stumbles across the cable therefore prompting the idea in her mind. This was just a brief insight and final conclusion into what – a kind of mind read based on the tells someone gives in reference to the psychological, confession and deception model we have outlined above.

Sexual Capitalism – Learning Inner Game for yourself and teaching it to her I really didn’t want to mention ‘Inner Game’ in my book, because, it’s usually just popular psychology applied to seduction. There are massive claims on the internet that by simply having a ‘good attitude’ you can hypnotize, and get with thousands of women. This really isn’t true, because if it was true there would be no techniques associated with pick up. But there clearly are, you can go to a nightclub with a pen and paper and jot down what interactions you see work and fail and you will clearly see the same routines, patterns, and approaches performed by guys who have never read a book on how to hypnotize or seduce women. Besides that as covered throughout the book there are numerous studies that cite support for various tactics, gambits, and games

that guys and girls play in order to strengthen feelings of lust in their initial interactions. The reason I’m writing about inner game is because. It stands to reason that if hypnosis as a PUA approach relies on the attention play, defined by economics, which is then extended using progressive compliance. Then the girls’ ability to pay attention to the moment and ignore distractions is crucial. And being as subjects tend to mimic the body language and attitudes of the performer, it stands to reason that he should be a model for these Zen-REM-like qualities himself. If a performer can enjoy the moment, feel relaxed in his own energy, and be fully present to the agent then perhaps she can understand how to do these things for herself, and through this find her lust for the performer. This will encourage her to experience her own sense of presence, and thus ability to full engage imaginatively. To quote the power of now Zen is when you “Just watch the thought, feel the emotion, observe the reaction” until you become aware of your own still, observing presence, “the silent watcher.” I see Zen as a state of relaxation; you can be energetic in your experience of the moment. To quote another Zen philosopher, Andre Gide states “Seize from every moment its unique novelty and do not prepare your joys” or Blaise Pascal states “I have discovered that all of man’s unhappiness derives from only one source, not being able to sit quietly in a room” In seduction Zen is frequently cited as a kind of relaxation; I recommend being energetic in your experience of the moment.

Raw energy comes from the freedom of experiencing gestaltian thought cycles. If you cannot relax because you have concerns about your career, life, etc. I really suggest that you take up meditation, naps, yoga, breathing exercises, practice ‘not thinking’ and take up drinking and doing what you feel whenever you feel like it. Being your own man; Often you will hear girls say “Be a man” it seems like girls have a clearer concept of what exactly a man is compared to a guy’s internal impression. You might even hear girls say “I just want a normal great guy” what exactly do they mean by this? Are there no great guys? Girls want a guy who can walk through this world proud of himself with his head held high, his shoulders back and his arms forwards. Like he means what he says, and he knows where he’s going. The way I see it is that you should be the man, they wish their fathers were more like; someone more respectable, more proud, and go-getting. This section has been here to emphasise how important it is to learn to hold your own energy.

Don’t kill your own game. Believe me, I’ve been there, I’ve misunderstood the stages and steps described in this book. Or I’ve just felt like not following the rules. And I got nowhere. Keep the stages separate in your mind; Gain the attention of the room, without alienating people by looking like your weird or strange. Once you gain compliance off a agent, you exaggerate

the compliance without alerting her attention, or letting her believe your weird or strange. This should be performed at a pace that is calibrated to her.

The significance of REM, relaxation, and sleep. To do this game really well, you’re going to have to relax and enjoy your own quality time with yourself. You’re resting hours, because you’re going to have to show the girl that you’re talking to how to access her ability to rest and enjoy herself outside the frame of all the things she should and shouldn’t be doing. Learn to love your own sleep, your resting time, and you can get to find those who also are willing to enjoy time to rest, and relax, and teach those that don’t know how to relax, how to copy you and become more in tune with their deeper hormonal instincts. It’s important to get a lot of sleep. Be aware of what time you’re going to be most active and move your sleep patterns around to match it, catch sleep when and where you can. How can you expect to sleep with someone, if you don’t sleep? Surely that’s a contradiction of terms, you need to find the time within yourself to enjoy the moment with yourself and enjoy moments with others. If she doesn’t have the Zen like relaxation and enjoyment of the moment, then she isn’t going to experience REM and be able to feel attraction before the close. The reason I refer to REM is because of studies into it, one way REM is actually identified to be occurring in a research laboratory is guys will experience spontaneous erections while they are going through the REM sleep cycle, girls experience lubrication. This is why you notice morning glory at various points in the morning, because you’ve woke up during an REM

cycle as opposed to a Deep sleep. Therefore one of the aims of a seducer should be to ‘stay with’ a agent rather than necessarily to ‘attract them’ because the moment you stay with a agent they should experience the necessarily emotions that turn the lust into attraction.

Being non-judgemental Never push onto the world, let them pull into you. I never hypnotize someone who isn’t ready for it, and therefore my results can be very high as I’m only selecting agents who I expect to succeed with because they are willing to pay attention to me, rather than going out and intentionally pushing hypnosis onto people like a dealer would push drugs, I wait for people to become captivated by me, fascinated by my presence and then have them engage in a process for a time being. The same goes for seduction subjects, I suggest you pick agents not based on your judgements about what’s attractive in the world, but based on who you think will be good at engaging in the manner required. If you’re thinking about all of your limitations, all of the preconceptions, all of your judgements on your own life, about which girls are attractive, which ones aren’t, then you aren’t going to get girls to be non-discriminative towards you. You can have standards of what girl your aiming for, but don’t let your wishes and hopes about tomorrow hold you back today. You’ve got from now till forever to get that girl, let’s have some fun.

The importance of a healthy diet, exercise resulting

in

blood

vessel

dilation,

and

production of oxytocin & testosterone You might notice that some nights all you want to do is go out and meet some girl, not because you’ve read a book on picking up girls and you want to practice your skills, but really because your desperately horny, if any girl tried it on with you on these nights you’d probably say yes regardless of how picky you are usually. Well the same goes for girls. On certain girls on certain nights are horny and they would truly get with any guy who approached them, whereas on other nights they really couldn’t care less about any guy regardless of how good looking, etc. speaks to them. A lot of it has to do with how much attention they are truly devoting to their internal feeling, a lot of it can be associated with relaxation and how they aren’t relaxed because of various stressors in their life, in the club etc. on that particular evening, however also there are other forces at work. You might notice, consecutively some girls are horny night after night, constantly looking for new partners, whereas other girls never ever would spend an evening with a stranger. This comes down to exercise and your diet. Being as it’s our duty to teach our subjects through leadership about how to live our lives, then it’s our duty to get our bodies in shape. By exercising you will increase your Testosterone Levels, and after sleeping the levels of Oxytocin (also known as the trust drug, or love drug) will be released as pheromones.

Which tend to cause girls to fall in love with you, although you’d need to emit huge amounts in order for her to detect it, which is not humanly possible, what is undoubt-able is that the production of these chemicals and hormones is a natural part of being a sexual human, and demonstrates to yourself that you are an attractive individual. Fruit and vegetables contain antioxidants, they somehow magically (don’t ask me) get rid of fat in your body, thereby making it easier for blood to flow around. Making your breathing allow you to get more oxygen to your vital organs, thereby increasing libido, intelligence, and reduce risk of heart attacks, strokes etc. Fatty foods are bad, somehow magically (don’t ask me how) fat gets stored at the sides of your blood, less blood gets down the vessels, and this means your heart has to beat faster to get more oxygen which somehow magically converts into energy around your body. Your diet needs lots of different metals and minerals, which you need to consume through various sources. The method I suggest is just alternating your meats, Beef, Chicken, Fish (omega oils; good for libido) and Eggs (protein). In addition to fruit and vegetables, there are beans, lentils, and grasses that also contain lots of chemicals you would otherwise never get to consume, for me the most important vitamin I’m looking to get out of wheat grasses is Vitamin B12 and some of the other B vitamins. Caffeinated drinks, sugary drinks, carbohydrates like bread should cause your blood vessels to constrict in the same way you would do if you were stressed, thereby decreasing the effectiveness of blood flow in encouraging oxygen round your body to the vital organs.

Masturbation, is a quick way to kill your free testosterone levels. The body of a healthy guy will naturally produce 4million sperm a day. There are different recommendations, but many medical associations consider a man to be at risk of being infertile if he has less than 40milliion sperm. Remember, sex has an evolutionary function. To procreate. Just as women at certain times of the month will be ‘on heat’ because they are most fertile during those times .You my friend are ‘on heat’ between 7-10days after your last sexual, or self-sexual encounter, you are most fertile, your libido will be at its highest, and as a result you will have a good motivation for talking to, and progressing women through the necessary stages described in the book. The psychological impact of pornography, or masturbation according to many guys has left them dependent on themselves, and learned to gain sexual satisfaction either only from themselves or the internet, meaning many have experienced conditioning that makes it difficult for them to enjoy sex with real life women. What I recommend is that you masturbate three times a month, that’s once every ten days, as you will have 40 million sperm ready inside of you by that point, and your libido, will increase. It’s the production of sperm that’s heavily linked to testosterone production. As your sperm count increases so will your testosterone levels.

Not attracted to anyone? I’ve been there. I’ve had long periods of my life where I truly haven’t fancied anyone. We’ve covered some of the physical,

hormonal reasons as to why you might be experiencing a lack of motivation to seduce girls. There are other things that you could be making a mistake on. As covered in the previous section, you might have conditioned yourself to fancy a particular type of ‘look’ or prefer a certain type of sexual act, and anything outside of those niches you can find unattractive. To get around this I recommend in addition to taking the steps covered in the previous chapter, that you purposely remind yourself while your interacting with a girl, what turns you on about her, maybe it’s the way you touch her, maybe it’s getting her to touch you. Maybe it’s when she smiles. Or something she does. I recommend you focus on imagining those things that will make you feel turned on about her, that way you will have more motivation to progress the interaction further. After doing this procedure a number of times you’ll eventually find that your standards, open up, that your horizons become broader and thus you will have a much more fulfilling sexual existence.

The Science of Cuteness In addition to attitudes, and health come actual procedures with inner game. That is to say, it’s not just how you feel internally but it’s also about how you convey to others that you feel like this. Is there a way that you can force interest from people? Yes, there is…. Be cute! Cuteness is heavily investigated area of evolutionary psychology. It invokes an evolutionary response to want to nurture. Lust comes from the want to look after something. Our

early social learning and exchange of values is triggered by us mimicking socially learned behaviours and associating traits. But how do celebrities morph themselves into being claimed to be uber attractive even when they don’t meet any of these physical-infant like specifications? To understand this we must understand how we can create the concept of ‘being cute’ in our audiences minds, and through doing this they visually distort their perception of the way you look, lets call this infant-morphitism. There is simply too much information to process upon meeting someone. And by bringing certain features to become more familiar and therefore more recognizable traits of a person, and leaving other features unnoticed will distort the physical appearance of you to your audience. In order to create this perception of cute in the mind of our audiences, we need them to notice our eyes regularly but without allowing them to analyze this process. This will naturally cause them to perceptionally enlarge the size of your eyes in their visual mind. If we can arouse the evolutionary protective mechanism in animals we can temporarily avoid profit seeking motivations in our target and instead direct them to engage in altruistic attitudes and behaviors. By eliciting this ‘imprinting response’ as discovered by Lorenz will cause these humans to want to work as a team. To promote the survival of the group, by seeking utility together and splitting the specialist tasks to achieve division of labor benefits. Allso by them paying attention to your face & head it should grow in respect to your body. This will give the apparent look of

your head being much larger than your body, therefrore making you look much more like a baby and thus cute. In order to achieve this visual illusion in the mind of our audiences we must misdirect the attention onto a guise that allows us the opportunity to create eye contact, staring at the lips etc. without arousing suspicion that you have ill intent and that being the reason for you to encourage this process. In our body language and the way we express emotions can also be cute, you can become a cute person. Adults tend to become dramatically more cynical and sceptical the older they get. They lose the magic. They only display emotionally swings briefly, and perhaps lack the intense giggle or estactic smile that you will find in a baby when you tickle it or wiggle its nose or lips. Infants can be noticed to easily mimick your body language, once you make them laugh or smile (perhaps because your happy) they will keep the enthuasim and express an intensity of emotion that we as adults may often find difficult. Infants, particularly your own offspring, are hyper sensitive to your body language cues. They learn from every little gesture you make, every flicker of emotion on your face and the verbal language, and behaviors that causally run along side these signals. If you pull a happy face to a baby it smiles and laughs back, then if you pull a sad face, perhaps it burst out crying hysterically and Is difficult to calm down. Has it never been considered that the dubbed psychological hysteria that women were diagnosed by their rich and successful husbands was not down to a medical condition or even sexual prejudice but instead actually a realistically diagnosis based upon the fact that wealthy high society in Victorian Britain

would often wed with girls significantly younger than them who may be still displaying infant like signs that have continued into their teenage lives. You want to be as responsive, as hysterical as this diagnosis. Not in a negative way, but to be reactive emotionally to those around you. When a good thing is happening to display big happy smile and to be happy for an unreasonable amount of time, 45 seconds plus. And when something unhappy happens, to be sad for beyond 45 seconds also.. People naturally fancy people who respond to them, and by you responding to your audience, they will grow warm to you. There are a range of behaviors that have been categorized into the evolutionary definition of cuteness. These are infantile personality traits, such as; playfulness, fragility, helplessness, curiosity, innocence, affectionate behavior, and a need to be nurtured are also generally considered cute. If you can be this emotionally expressive and responsive to your audience, they will perceive you as likeable individual who they want to build a strong relationship with. The look people give you in order to force you to perceive them as cute, for example making direct eye contact and smiling, is same look of responsiveness of fascination, of picking up every tiny body language cue that you put out that advanced hypnotists, persuaders and seduction experts notice in their audiences, and suddenly they pounce on that subject. But may I suggest that by being cute, by being cool and interesting you actually cause people to build up their own responsiveness towards you and therefore turn them hypersensitive to your cues. That is to say they pick up ‘social learning’ from you. By creating this perception of cute, and then bringing out the responsiveness and cuteness of our audiences in return, we can

take advantage of their natural human instinct while directing their team spirit onto the utility quest paths that we want them to engage in, doing this using gentle leadership. Do I believe in attraction. No, I think attraction is like a frustration of not getting something you want. But in order to get to the position of attraction you need to lose something you wanted. Creating a want is like writing surrealistic poetry. All wants Start only with just a flicker of attention, just the fact that someone is looking at you or listening to you, or standing near you. It then becomes this progression, that you are now talking to them and they are listening paying interest when they could easily just walk away. Before someone is attracted to you, they must have a sense that they ‘had you’ and then ‘lost you’. This means that you progressed from interest into an ‘emotional investment’ where someone values the potential loss that they could experience, the more you invest the more you care to protect your investment. So this might mean that she is holding onto you, she has your phone number, she’s called and texted you. You kissed. And suddenly she feels like she might be losing you. Never be afraid to be open and honest about everything, providing you reframe it in a positive light and make yourself out to be a fun person. Remember large swings of emotion with big expressions comes across really cute. Infants are naïve. And by acting like your naïve and you believe in concepts like 'love at first sight' and trust people. Then your likely to be seen as a 'cute person'

The reality is that being intelligent, or important, or serious or a hard worker doesn't attract anyone, as much as we might hope that our efforts in becoming good at something, or becoming wealthy will attract. It doesn’t it’s the benefits it creates that attracts, everything comes down to how well you can judge the responsiveness of those your speaking to, and how well you can turn people who aren’t ‘into your social learning world’ into it. How can you make girls and guys hypersensitive to every look, gesture, and instruction that you offer? Cute is clearly a part of this. There is evidence to believe that this process of imprinting continues into later life. For example other studies have shown that when high levels of this imprinting bonding hormone (Oxytocin) exists as a pheromone between potential mates, they are likely to go on to form a relationship. Consequently, it’s likely that imprinting, and the exchange of socially learned behaviors occur between individuals who seem to offer the economically based cost-benefit reward of for example, safety, or aid in achieving goal pursuits, or are just the easiest choice. In addition to these ways in which we can form relationships or responsiveness with complete strangers, the science of the imprinting response shows that we can hijack this automatic response using several tricks that have been left as evolutionary templates in most mammals. These are Touch, Eye contact, Sharing of information amongst others described throughout this book. By creating a small agreement of fascination from an individual, we can quickly develop this into a imprinting style hyper sensitivity to mimic our behaviors and be hyper responsive to our suggestions.

So I regularly point out that there is no strict attraction state, that there is no such thing as necessarily as a spontaneous “I see you and I’m attracted” there is things that trigger such a response and one of those things is cuteness. Babies, kittens, heads with massive eyes, and faces that are smiling, and happy, we can easily relate to, we instantly think ‘I want to look after that thing’, ‘I want to nurture that thing’ and that nurturing response, that wanting to own something could be described as the ‘only spontaneous instant attraction you can have’ but I guess if everyone in the world was doing that we would be back to this perfectly competitive situation anyway and then you’d need to consider all the other points that we cover throughout this section, you wouldn’t have a monopoly if that happened. The reality is, we are all hardwired conditioned to respond to certain cues to nurture etc. so it doesn't even matter, you want to cuddle a five year old, you want a pet kitten, its hardwired. Do I see inner game or natural game as important? How can you force interest from people? Is there an ultimate cheat as to getting people to like you? Be cute. Cuteness is heavily investigated area of evolutionary psychology. It invokes an evolutionary response to want to nurture. Lust comes from the want to look after something. Our early social learning and exchange of values is triggered by us mimicking socially learned behaviours and associating traits.

Leaving Assumptions Behind Assumptions & Associations: What motivates people? We are here to finally conclude Sexual Capitalism - The aim of the book was to discover the motivations of Men and His

Market, and to work out how to create a code that will allow us to become more dominant in this competitive environment. I’d like to open the final chapter on the following quote; “Happiness lies in the joy of achievement and the thrill of creative effort. “ - Roosevelt We are going to conclude with alot of information about happiness in the final chapter and how this is an important way of assessing the stucture of the person we are speaking to. Happiness, and the places we associate it. Quickly consume and take over our mind, for me - the way I finally acquired success in my life was by becoming as boring as possible - so boring in fact that I only had one thing left in my life left - I lost everything purposely so that I would purely only be able to find happiness by achieving through creative effort experiencing the flow. This is the number one way that you can achieve happiness in your life, by letting go of the wants, the jealously the needs of the future, what you think you should be doing in your life and instead focusing just on your creative ability within the present moment, without judgements of whether what you are creating is your best possible work, or whether what you are doing is the right thing, and instead just doing as much output as you possibly can to the best of your resources available. What we will discover throughout the following chapter is how peoples attention really moves towards their sense of happiness, and how often this feeling of happiness is used to control people. For example if you look at England it has a drinking problem, as does america and many other countries where people really do

gain alot of joy out of drinking, but with it comes such a great deal of suffering, the misallocation of resources, the time consumption on something that isn’t actually going towards their creative process and the damage to their health and IQ. Unfortunately many have tried to manipulate our values and sense of happiness by showing us symbols of success, and symbols of what things should make us feel comfortable, these things’ draw our attention, the reality is, that if you leave a monkey in a cage where it has either the option to consume cocaine or eat food, it will choose the cocaine over food, and unfortunately this need for dopamine regularly tickles the human race. Take a look at the example of sugar, people seem to act as if it increases their sense of being ‘more awake’ one of the core human desires that you regularly see people try to achieve by consuming, but this need to rely on an external source - to balance oneself is a bit unnecessarily especially one that really does throw the entire health of the immunology of the human entirely out of balance for a three hour period as does sugar or cafffine. However it seems people are happy to take these risks to their own health - for a brief moment of enjoyment, that if related regularly could cost them a lifetime of wasted energy and pursuits into goals that only felt good because of the brief dopamine rush caused by sugar or caffeine overload and not because it was the thing that was right for the person to be doing with the abilities and attention at that moment in time. I believe throughout this book we have uncovered many secrets of persuasion. But what we will discover in this final chapter is that by playing with this eb and flow between the extremes of

‘being wired - paying attention ’ vs ‘Being peaceful - thinking laterally & creatively’ are greatly affected by peoples relationship with time, space, independence, - governed by the very nature of object relations and economics outlined from the start of the book in Man and His Introduction. What we will see is the the happiness chip within someones head fortunately or unfortunately is easily tinkered with and people are regularly playing with your sense of happiness and quickly this can either put you into a position of strength and power - or it can turn you into a weak, helpless person who is constantly self destructing and destroying everything good in their life. We will also reveal that there is a secret on how to dominate the attention of others, by controlling their happiness by realigning their goals, using their peaceful resourceful creative state, their ability to dream about what they want in the future, and commit them to being helpless and rely on you in the present by suddenly experiencing a dopamine rush and an adrenal lockdown. I consider this method the perfect abstract sense of the idealized sequence that has taken a great deal of time to come up with although I write this section after a long break from Sexual Capitalism - Sexual capitalism has been a work in progress for over three years, and purposely in order to make sure that the different sections of the book weren’t too similar, I tried to have breaks before writing each individual chapter. So although I might write every chapter and mention how important this chapter is, I want you to bare in mind how significant I believe the chapters on Humour, onemanupship,

and the philosophy of a man are to the information present in this chapter here. Quickly I want to reliterate some of the most important tips when talking to new people, and how to actually make sure you are making an impact i) Slow down time - make the person you are speaking to feel special, give them your undivided attention, this is a very weird feeling for most people as honestly usually people are really just thinking about all kinds of things when they communicate, just hold the moment. ii) Hold your sense of self, and what your trying to achieve as paramount, invite others into your world but only if they are able to actually work. Let’s think back to the work of Socrates - and how we opened the book with a story about whether Socrates is indeed the wisest of all men. We almost implied or outright said that. It was Socrates ability to doubt absolutely, whereas other men trusted their own judgements that allowed Socrates to instantly see the flaws in almost any logical induction or deduction by man, where others would be easily fooled and blinded by their ‘smartness’. This dominant position of knowing - ‘one pure truth’ - for absolute certain is something that we endorse, and by you following the progress of your creative output and holding your flow as paramount as per described in the Roosevelt quote at the beginning of this chapter. Then consider this your protection from evil, and your ability to control any situation you encounter. This is that little precious seven pounds of soul that

you have, and if you cling onto that - you’ll be stronger than anyone you encounter and you will be admired for it. Most people walk around aimlessly, they don't have a plan, the moment you become hyper-focused on what your aiming to achieve, to be honest everyone around you just wants to get involved - they might have all kinds of reasons for wanting to be involved with you - they might need the money and from you being efficient you happen to be producing some, they might think that you are a fun and enjoyable person and they find that by spending time with you they are somewhat becoming more interesting themselves. They might find that by you being ultra focused- laser focused seems to make some solid impact over their own lives. Think back to the story that I mentioned - perhaps it was earlier in this book or in another where a friend asked me why I believe that 'Single dads with kids seem to get all the women' - and that the reason I suggested was because the guys seemed consistent in their approach, what they were doing might not be indications of success - like these guys might not drive a Porsche, they might not own a football club but what they are doing is producing consistent output - towards a goal, and doing the everyday bitesize chunks to get there. So even though what they are currently doing - isn't showing clear indications of success. What they are engaging in is the actual steps that it takes to be successful, what they are doing is focusing on the process - in the step by step day by day what they can do to make the most positive and powerful outcome of that individual moment. When I was young, I seemed to have quite a lot of success in several aspects of my life. and for years I was constantly

questioning why exactly that was - one thing I couldn't understand - was that I was working jobs that honestly I didn't really like, I really wanted to quit and become a hypnotist. I had zero free time what so ever. So what would happen would be that I would wake up about 6.30am and I would go to the Gym. I would work out as hard as I possibly could only to go School at 9 am. And then I would be at school till perhaps 4pm in the Afternoon, I might quickly rush home and do some homework before starting work usually at 6pm. Then I would work till about 11.30pm finish, and then because I felt like the entire day hadn't amounted to anything I would hit the nightclubs where I would attempt to pick up girls. I would mentally select who I believed were the top 15 girls that I would happily get with in the club. ( I didn't think too much about my standards, I thought simply about which girls I thought would be fun to get with rather than focusing on being a perfectionist - like my idealised type, in several places in the book we talk about the flaws of being a perfectionist and this is another example that one could easily make.). I would select which girls I thought were the top 12 that I would actually likely to stand a chance with out of those 15, so I would aim to eliminate three girls from the list who for whatever reason I didn't think were a good opportunity to approach. And then the rest I would do the exact same strategy, I would see them across the room, I would seem like my whole world lit up the moment I made eye contact with them, and then I would look away like I was just 'happy in general' and then I would wait 4 seconds and then I would look back to see if they were looking - then I would imply the words "hey" or I would go to

wave "as if i knew the girl already" but then seem to not complete the wave, or the hi, because I was merely responding to the girl as if she was some kind of ex girlfriend that I hadn't seen in a long time, that I somehow had secret feelings for - but would never realize myself. Anyway, my aim would be for about a 40% success rate, I would see which girls smiled back, and then aim to accidently bump into her in person - and literally bump into her accidently as in actually bump her, touch her or better still - have her touch me accidently sometime within the next two minutes. (this time frame was important). Now bare in mind I was tired, I had to be awake in only 3 hours to do my gym work - and I would do this sequence of closing at three key times in the evening 11.45 (early) - people who go to a store first thing in the morning - are going to buy - most sales in shops and in car showrooms happen in the morning - and the people who come in the afternoon are the browsers, then quickly before the end of the day sometimes you get people who rush in to make a purchase but often these people will use the time delay as an excuse to buy the purchase tomorrow - however in the world of nightclubs there might not be tomorrow with that person - although that might not necessarily matter because if her goal is to 'meet a boy' then realistically underneath it all, really any boy will be sufficient. Anyway, the point being, I was knackered. I didn't have a bit of energy left in me. I looked Exhausted. I hated my life. But I really was getting laid 50% of the time's that I went out - Bizzare right There is nothing more sexy than someone who is 'on a mission'. Just think 'James Bond' if you have a goal and you are pursing it, it really doesn't matter how knackered you look.

Knowing what you want isn't great because it communicates dominance, it's that people don't really know what they want and buy having someone who is laser focused is an attractive thing because it gives the person who is speaking to them focus, direction, something to do, somewhere to go, it suddenly makes them know exactly what they need to do. It stops all the lack of confidence. You need to think like this - there is pretty much just three people in life - people who hate their lives - people who don't know what they want and self actualized people. The way to quickly recognize which one of the three roles the person your speaking to is you need to ask yourself the question "would I hire the person I'm speaking to?", "If I lent the person I'm speaking to money would they go out and achieve their goals or would they just frit it away", "if the person I'm speaking to offered to help me on a project - am I having them help me because I need them to complete my project because I feel helpless. Or, is it because they are really organised and focused and they can complete tasks and complete promises". If the person you're speaking to isn't that focused person then they need you to take leadership and control, the best way to do this isn't by being egotistical, it has nothing to do with ego, its just about you being on your pursuit and using the tiny inch of opportunity that life gives you and makes the most of it. Yesterday a girl who is a Lesbian - broke up with her girlfriend (who also is gorgeous) because she said that she was in Love with me because she believed that I was going to be massively successful. Now you could argue that the reason she wants me is because of money, but it really isn't about that. It's that being focused, being driven rather than actually just claiming your

going to do something but actually taking the second by second moment by moment most important tasks and seeking out the positives in every opportunity around you makes you seem great.

Girls, want you to close them! That's the cold fact. They want you to sales them into sex. The same way that if you're a salesman not many people are going to make a purchase just because the product is great. There are two things that need to be in place i) they need to think you are charming/cheeky ii) you need to pressure close them, and lead them into an uncomfortable situation but make them feel good and excited about being their - usually by making them feel special or massaging their ego. Anyway, so what I decided when I was young was that there were so many great girls - that all I wanted to do was have the free time to actually spend more time with them and actually enjoy myself - but guess? the moment I stopped working on making the most of every second of my day - going to the gym, getting straight A's at school, and working to earn money - is the same moment that suddenly know girls were interested in me. It's like me - looking fully well dressed, not tired/knackered exhausted actually made me less attractive - Bizarre right?

Tip 1: Being a nice guy will destroy your life. I want to take this moment to quickly reference Ross Jeffries and mention how much I think he is an absolute genius compared to the majority of pick up approaches you will ever discover out there on the market.

I'm just going to quote some of his words for a moment and briefly mention why I think this is so significant. Ross Jeffries States to a girl; “I’m NOT “nice”. [pause] To be nice is to be weak. I’m [pause]… “Pleasing”. “Pleasing” is power… held in proper restraint… and exercised with precision. [Lock eyes and touch anchor] Can you feel that? Can you feel the difference?” (date accessed 29/08/2012: seduction.com) See many people from the pick up artist community who are trying to interpret and judge the Ross Jeffries quote will inaccurately describe it as a quote that's illustrating the importance of social dominance - they might claim that - 'a man's job is to be an alpha male and communicate to women that he is the leader of the pack'. However this isn't how I believe Ross Jeffries would explain his words, and it's not my experience of what the words above mean either. The reason for the significance of the words isn't to demonstrate dominance, it's to communicate that he is only pleasing to the point where it benefits both him and her in a kind of equilibrium, its a kind of honesty to not waste her time, and to best allocate his resources to help her. What you need to understand is what took me a long time to understand myself. See I've always seen myself as a kind of caring person - I thought that I was one of a few rare breeds of altruistic people (I used to believe that nonsense) now when I hear someone else describe themselves as altruistic I laugh. See I knew full well that Adam Smith in his early works on Philosophy and the origins of wealth discussed that it's impossible for humans to be altruistic, but I think it took me a long time to understand what that meant.

The best way that you can be a good person in life, isn't by trying to be a good person, it's by being the best you that you can possibly be. "Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us... Your playing small does not serve the world.” She continues; “…There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.” - Marianne Williamson Everyone has heard the above quote, but I don't know if others truly know what it means - take the example of money (sorry that I keep on using that example) but suppose I go out for a night out with my sister and one of my best friends to a different city and this costs me a total of 50 pounds? Sounds like nothing right? I mean it's only 50 pounds what difference does that make. It makes a hell of a lot of difference if it's not actually the best way to help people - if I'm seeing my sister and my friends because I think it benefits their lives to do so, then I need to question whats the best possible way I can help others. Would it be better that I went out for a night out with them, and probably had a night that none of us remember, or would it serve me and them better if I spent the evening working, and

then happened to move into my sisters place temporarily to help them out on paying off their mortgage, that 50 pounds could be better spent spending a week at their place, helping them receive an extra 50 quid, while I work on my projects, and I get to see them over the course of a week - rather than just a single night out where we are spent in a noisy room and can't really talk about anything significant. Not only that but if I spent that time solidly focusing on my projects and goals - it's likely that I would have made further money that would have delivered me more opportunities in the future, that would have allowed me to allocate my resources even further. Sorry to sound like i'm going all religious on you - but I would go as far to say as that if there is a God, he wants the best for you - and that means for you. You are a person who by focusing on himself is better able to allocate the right equipment to others. Wealth could be defined as the ability to allocate the correct and appropriate type of resources for the situation that they are trying to turn into a more valuable one. By doing this you become a more - idealised version of man - some kind of 'true man'. People are basically controlled by their desire to seek more value in life. If you are talking to a person and you're not looking to make some kind of exchange with them not only are you wasting your own time but you are wasting there's also, people can feel this intention, and if you don't know why you are speaking to someone then the person will also be questioning why you don't seem to know what you want in your life. There are lots of unintelligent people out there, and it's easy to fall into the same traps as they fall into that trap them into that

position. What you need to do is rise to the position where you are completely and independently focused on the differences you can make, how you allocate your time, without fear of failure, worries about the past, or desire to be perfect in the future - focusing merely on the opportunities - (forgive the phrasing) that God places right in front of your eyes. How can we make people make decisions for us? Right let's give some more focus on how we can hypnotize people, or how we can make people who are motivated to pay attention to us and listen to us perfectly. I want to focus on a story where I was doing magic on a girl in a bar - she was completely unresponsive and honestly there was nothing that I would be able to do with a target like that. People tend to learn how to switch off to the world - they become immune to their environment and they stop learning their environment falls too plainly and fits in too nicely into the boxes (judgement boxes) that they have that they become incapable of realizing the opportunities right in front of their eyes. These people are impossible to hypnotize because everytime you suggest something - every time you mention a field of learning or study - they think that you are talking about something else and thus are unable to hear you - for example if I try telling a girl about quantum physics in a nightclub she might incorrectly believe that what i'm trying to do is show off that I'm intelligent and thus that judgement means that she focuses on that and thus is unable to hear the actual learnings that I'm attempting to deliver.

This is ridiculously common. It actually happens nearly every time you speak to someone, but you might not notice that it's occurring Honestly I'm going to tell you this tip, and I know you might not be listening because you think i'm talking from my ego, this is something that I haven't said before because I think you might think its weird - dude.... one of the reasons that I am so persuasive is that I'm weird as anything. I say the most unpredictable things, the most unusual things, it's like I've purposely trained myself to speak in riddles and rhymes people hear me say things that 'shock' most of the jokes that I tell are 'shock' I say things that you would never expect to hear someone to say, and when I act like that... guess what everyone is awake and listening to me with wide open eyes - it’s unpredictable they can’t contextualize it. During university if you asked me why I had such success as a hypnotist I would tell you that the reason I was experiencing great results was because “I pretended to be everyone's imaginary friend" that's such a weird thing to say, but what I would do is make the assumption that the person I'm speaking to has no contact with the real world - that they actually are experiencing something called philosophical solipsism. What I would do is pace and lead their sense of philosophical solipsism, and actually speak to them as if I am their imaginary friend and I know everything about them, I do this simply by reflecting back their statements but to do this in the way that you learn in counselling or psychotherapy study wouldn't be enough as it would be too obvious, you need to actually assume their is logic tree's to what the person you're speaking to is thinking and actually use these trees to further unpick their understanding.

People are predictable What motivates people…? Well for sure, we all believe that we are capable of making decisions, and our decisions we accept are usually designed to cause us to take up opportunities and be attracted to information that furthers our chance to exist. This makes peoples thoughts pretty predictable as you know that all they are trying to do is find a better way to exist, the thing is the better way to exist doesn't exist within the opportunities that they currently have available to them, their opportunities lie in the information they already have but they can't see the gaps in between what they know because they are too focused on the judgements, and short sighted perceptions that they have that promote quick-snap judgements of their environment that stop them seeing the full picture - the places they want to be if only they could. “There is little chance of learning because the learning and interpretations are internally self consistent. They are wrong, but wrong in ways that do not easily reveal themselves” There often is a trade off in the things you want, but you tend to fall back into the habits that you've built consistently. See, I can do magic, and I can do hypnosis. and I can go to bars and try and get gigs there. the problem is I also know how to get traffic on the internet, I'm quite capable of thinking and writing down my thoughts in book format, producing audio's. And I also often too much want to just have people listen to me, and unfortunately that focus means that often I resort to those resources that I seem to habitually fall into - I use them to find the resources I need in my life - I use them to help my love life,

my relationships, my money. Whereas other people with different areas of habit might use other options - hypnotherapy clients, etc. For me it's far easier to fly to another country on a last minute flight, get a visa while on the aeroplane, and get a hotel while I arrive to not sleep for four days to teach a hypnosis course in a city I know nothing about, spending a currency that I don't know how much is worth. I find that easy, so I rely on it. Whereas when it comes to attending networking meetings, or going round local gyms, or getting to know the doctors in the local city to have them do patient referrals for a hypnotherapy clinic, that is uncomfortable? It's not something I really want to do. It's not something I would easily know where to begin to start doing, I mean here I'm here writing and describing the steps to take in order to do it, but it's something I'm immune to getting excited about doing - because I'm too busy emotionally distracted by what somehow has stolen my focus... (see futurepace, bait & switch - something that we talk about later in the text).

How can you wake people up from their zombie slumber?

- Kill The Mundane And

Create Energetic Interactions. How to make everything you say seem amazing! How to become an amazingly interesting person and make life enjoyable. Most people are walking around like mindless zombies! Why you need to change? and Make others change with you.

Your risk-reward chip kind of most the time is just completely switched off, people are walking around as zombies asleep, and its only until imminent death is about to occur, or a freaking amazing opportunity, like a naked girl jumps into your bed that suddenly you're like “wow, I’m actually alive, this is all real, and I feel at peace with the universe”. You need to look at the 38 hypnosis step approach that we outline in the online hypnosis training course http://www.streethypnotism.com , you will find fragments of it explained in this section. The model roughly goes that you need to relax people when you first meet them, usually this means that you approach them in a way that is non-threatening and doesn't arouse suspicion. You come in under the radar, and you attempt to make the person you're speaking to feel really peaceful. The reason why you want them to feel peaceful is so you can have the think really laterally and creatively, because you're going to want them not to start using their judgements in order to contextualize the world. We hypothesis a theory of how people have two polar opposites and how these are significant to emotions and attention, attention is governed by the need to seek opportunity, but attention will not be allocated towards opportunity if a person is consolidating their risk. You should make the assumption that nearly anyone you speak to is actually consolidating their risks in life - they are basically maintaining the resources they have and making those resources their central focus. This means having the friends that they are used to, working the same job that they are used to using.

Honestly I feel like if someone isn't expanding what they are trying to achieve then I believe their body will begin to start shutting down the same way a leg falls off if it doesn't receive any blood flow, I feel that people's cells in their body won't properly duplicate unless they are constantly maintaining that little bit of hope - that little bit of domination of their own sense to make an impact on the world. When we opened the book with the "introduction to man" chapter what our focus was on, was what makes a man feel powerful where does our true sense of 'sexiness' come from what makes us actually feel that we are independent in ourlives and where does our inner sense of 'ego' come from. See I want to go back to a point that I have touched upon alot, but I haven't outright said - maybe as explicitly as I need to saybasically it's that - without an ego you really can't be taken seriously. You need to be the kind of person who stands up and fights for something in your life, as it really means that you're not taking a unique strategy and don't actually stand out compared with your competitors, one of the main premises of the sexual capitalism model was the idea that - social environments are perfectly competitive as they contain infinite number of competitors who are profit seekers who quickly dive in and out of the market every time their is a surplus opportunity to take and the moment that this opportunity arises then it is immediately reallocated and divided amongst an infinite number of competitors and thus divided down to be zero - as in worthless. I had a friend who I had known for years - she didn't see like she would ever be able to be hypnotized by me, a number of times I

gave it a shot and began attempting to hypnotize her and nothing at all significant began to happen - with her the entire interaction was never significant as we spent nearly every day together it was hard to make any individual moment really stand out. One day she was only in her knickers and bra, so I pulled her off the bed and onto the floor, and then began to speak weirdly and began to hypnotize her, it was like an absolute dream, suddenly she followed every instruction as if by magic without doing any particularly obvious hypnosis approach. The same goes for a girl the other day who I met in a club, I was in an Unique circumstance, I said to her that she could come back and stay and that I would show her my books on hypnosis. She decided to come back and then claimed that she found all this very interesting, I hypnotized her while in bed with her, and while simply just using a handful of words and made it look absolutely magical, it was really me just being positive and enthusiastic and opening her eyes up to a new side of life that is always there were she could be bright eyed and fluffy tailed and see how everyday experiences can be opening and revealing events that uncover more about the creativeness within ourselves of these artistic moments as we interact with colors, time, and space and be and flow from moment to moment. A hypnotists goal should be to play with these elements.... however unfortunately the books you can purchase on hypnosis seem unable to illustrate and explain about these moments, you buy books that are full of old fashioned techniques, that give you step by steps - but every rule that can be made, can be broken as many times as the cases it actually works for. The rules themselves aren't the approach its about the governing

psychology which unfortunately can take a lifetime to learn and hence why I need to explain through various little titbits that bring the entire approach together. So let's give another example of how you can wake people up from their zombie slumber and later throughout this section we will go more through the step by step model explaining the 38 approach that we've been using in our hypnosis for the past year or so. One night I was doing magic in a bar - and two girls came over giving me a bit of a attitude and said "hey show us a trick then" these girls seemed like they were somehow saying that with a bit of ego, like they were just using this moment to somehow gain some attention out of a stranger - perhaps they wanted to be made to feel pretty because they didn't feel 'hot enough' or maybe its just because part of their evening is all about 'making themselves stand out' so the rest of the week they can spend earning and being boring so they can just have that one night a week where their ego is built up. Their way, I knew their set up was designed to make me some kind of 'entertainer' some kind of pleasure giver tool for them for which they could just 'rip off' and use the energy I put out there for their own benefit without giving anything back because I didn't communicate any strength, any 'get up and go' in my own life, I didn't display qualities of making stuff happen and focusing on my selfish desires and making everything I touched into the gold, using what was around me to demonstrate my 'overcoming' my winning over nature, the dominance of my surroundings and the ownership of her through the true ownership of myself by expressing a single elegant truth - like Socrates expressing "I know that I know nothing" the simple

ability to know a truth, can divide everything anyone else says surrounding him into incomprehensible pieces that no longer make any sense and make him the greatest philosopher or inquirer of all because he is able to cut through all the BS and find actually what the underpinnings of someone's philosophic logic is in any discussion. So in order to communicate a social set-up that would be more beneficial to myself, I said to the two girls "I'm not performing anymore tonight". What I did then was I went up to another girl who I caught the eye of, and did a magic trick on her - as if it was all an accident, knowing that what I would do is actually make the girls jealous. I know it worked perfectly as the hot girls interrupted and said “I thought you weren't performing any more tonight” I ignored them and continued. The moment after I finished the trick, I turned to one of the hot girls and said “You can't remember your name, its gone” I asked her for her name and she said “I can't remember” I said to her “You know when you feel like you've known someone your whole entire life, like a secret crush, that you want to tell all of your friends about once you finally kiss them”. She took me over onto the dance floor and we kissed. For weeks after I had girls coming up to me announcing that their friend loves me! Apparently she had been telling almost everyone from her village about how I was the best guy ever, but that I was too good for her. I’m fairly certain this would have not been her opinion of me prior to this elaborate use of language and social dynamics.

You Can’t Influence the brain dead. So when you walk up to someone to influence, they are not listening.. they are asleep… they are a zombie… they don’t have that central command in the brain running, unless of course you're talking to an artist, a creative, a drug-user, or perhaps someone who for some random reason alcohol still actually produces a buzz for, perhaps because they have barely left the house in their life… and this is their first night out! Therefore I propose a solution.. to wake people up! Why don’t you just take crazy people on roller coasters? Excitement, causes your heart to beat fast! The intense emotion investment that this creates has been studied by researchers. In one study psychologists Cindy Meston, and Penny Frohlich (2003) decided to find out, they visited to large theme parks, and waited near roller coasters armed with photographers of average looking men and women. They had them evaluate the attractiveness of these photos before and after going on the roller coaster. Afterwards participants rated the photos significantly more attractive! Wiseman (2009:171) It’s a weird question right… but sometimes don’t you think that life has lost that spark… either your depressed because its all just a bit repetitive and dull… or you have an overactive mind because you seem to be focusing on the wrong things, and giving weight and emotion to unimportant situations… trauma’s in the past, or angry thoughts. Wouldn’t it be great if you could reset your emotions, and suddenly be free again?

According to associative learning in Psychology, it seems that people attach emotions to the situations they experience them in. These emotions look like they get ‘tied in’ and you end up having those emotions purely set to the situation you gave attention to. According to the Gestalt Theory of Psychotherapy when that attention never gets used – like suppose you're angry with someone but you never actually tell them. Then what happens is ‘a part of your personality’ is reserved – that segment of energy is stored away. I figured that Roller Coasters are a really good way of taking you through the up and downs of emotions without being in a situation that is overly traumatic or harmful, no long term effects should occur from going on a fast ride. Just purely the feeling of having your adrenaline levels raised up. By learning the feelings of your emotional levels, moving and changing allows you to be better understand your cognitive self. The states you move through, throughout time, and this will help you learn emotional intelligence.. Soon you begin to realize that many of your thoughts – and memory are actually tied into different experiences. For example in Architecture they study how ‘spaces’, ‘places’, ‘rooms’ are journeys of discovery. That when you move through a building, space or maze… its not the maze your uncovering, its actually yourself. Because your emotions, mood, the sort of conversations you have- change with every space and situation you encounter causes a reaction. Through the connection of these ‘spaces’ - i.e. by walking causes stories/dialogues within the person - as their ‘way’ flows from one moment to the next.

The failure of the persuader, is to believe that the personality of the person you're speaking to, is stable. That it is a solid unit, that a belief that they have is actually fully formed. When you actually speak to people and listen to the underlying philosophy of the things they say, often you find that people are constantly quoting films, scripts and lines from TV programs, they have ideas about how business is to be conducted from the major companies competing for advertising space in their head at the time, and they generate their sense of morality from whether they are being a good person comparatively to their friends. All this stress isn’t related to the experience with oneself. Hold yourself, and feel like someone you’d respect. There is a well known study, where participants who went on a rollercoaster were asked to rate the attractiveness of portraits in photograph’s both before they went on the roller coaster and afterwards. These post-roller coaster riders rated the portraits extremely attractive – purely because they had rode the coaster and it raised their emotions. The reason for this is, the central command of a person is directly brought online when heart rate and cardiac output increases, blood pressure is shown to either stay the same or actually drop, this is why you get just as much access to your internal creative abilities, because the blood flow - i.e. Oxygen in your brain still touches all the areas and doesn’t consolidate to just doing the minimal essential tasks, but this process of investing into activities, having the attention to quickly switch is brought on by the increased cardiovascular response.

The people who are falling in love with the photographs they look at, after they’ve had their emotions heightened by the rollercoaster aren’t evaluating the personality traits of the photo they are looking at when they describe them as “Cute”, “Perfect”, “A nice guy” they are describing their re-discovered soul of themselves, and projecting this optimism and hope about society onto the photograph. “Being highly hypnotizable is the cutest thing in the world!” When you see someone who is highly emotionally responsive and open, with big eyes! You can’t help but fall in love. The only two things to have been shown in history to affect hypnotisability have been increased emotional responsiveness, which has been shown in studies where they have done hypnotic tests on participants while they are consuming laughing gas, and imaginativeness assessments, having a highly creative personality for example drama students, art students, all having higher hypnotisable-ness. I’ve found the same results attending parties within the cultural world, I’ve travelled a lot around the world and I’ve mainly hanged out with, (being as I was self employed teaching hypnosis) with other people who are either self employed artists (or out of work ones). This is one of the reasons why I have had significant practice and success as a hypnotist and one of the reasons for my huge confidence, these subjects are not representative, but by taking their attitude to life… by making people become creative in their attitude and their approach to the new situation you put them in, then you are directly getting the exact responses I got through changing the environment around you for the people you meet.

Success is all in your head, and you need to deliver this aura. People are capable of being persuaded and they love being sold to. Don’t worry about being too pushy. It’s actually not like that. People like you to be pushy, they want to rediscover all the reasons why they love life, they just need someone elicit them. When the central command is highly active, it begins to anticipate and organise mental representations to be ready (primed) to deal with the upcoming anticipated situation (on going emergent situation) by the central command getting these ideas ready for use in advance of interpreting the situation, or making an action, it chooses the most appropriate recalls for the situation in terms of risk vs reward, and makes these schema’s highly activated and thus easily accessible.

What truly motivates people and how can you hook them in? People are motivated by opportunity to survive, “You don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone” This is thus the first step in any approach, and why we have dedicated such a huge amount of information to designing your character, building your approach of groups, and conveying yourself in the right manner. When we feel that a situation is better solved, or more efficiently met through passing control over to the central command, our consciousness typically takes responsibility and carries that out.

For example when you are driving particularly fast, your mind automatically makes the decision to place your attention on the road, even if you turn up the music loud, have a phone call, or have screaming children at you… you automatically will make those children be quiet, or kill the phone call, or turn down the music if your driving ability is hampered to the point where imminent death is likely. However like implied, people don’t typically do such rash actions as dedicating their entire computing power to a single activity until imminent death, is actually about to occur. This is because people seem unable to connect with risks that aren’t … you know related directly to being a human, for example people struggle to be motivated by money, even if they know they are going to earn 1000 pounds in the morning doesn’t mean they wake up early and do a significant more about of effort in order to secure the sale? Let’s put it another way, if you went up to a girl in a nightclub and offered her 500 pounds to take her home, I think you would have a significant portions of slaps in the face and very few girls would actually accept your offer of the 500 pounds even though I bet you that 90% of the girls in the club really need that 500 pounds. The reason they won’t except isn’t because they think you're being rude, or because “they are not like that” its because they don’t see the value of money. Even if you were the most gorgeous guy in the club, dead sexy, they would not accept the money and you would still receive a slap if you offered it to them. if you asked them why they slapped you, they would say “because you don’t need to pay,

your gorgeous, but just the fact you ask makes you weird so I’m not going to do it” The this example - you can notice that the girl doesn’t seem to have made a rational decision. Yet people are supposed to always choose the most efficient response? so why is this… ? People simply aren’t motivated by things that don’t immediately further their existence - because she is not in a situation that means she needs to make a decision not usually within her comfort zone - then she will just decline. She isn’t awake, she doesn’t know its a good opportunity. This is your opportunity to use the principles of marketing to make someone’s call to action sense of really interacting with ongoing data come alive and start learning exactly the things you are saying, and setting up ‘if-then’ response cues that makes decisions, beliefs and carries out actions for you. - See the ‘Superneg’ further down in this chapter as this explains more.

Summarizing the Sexual Capitalism Model Throughout the text Sexual Capitalism we have explained an elaborate system to understand - the nature of hypnosis - to not only be part of human decision making but also - that human decision making is governed by the realm of normal economic forces that can be predicted through normal market analysis that can be found in the world of economics. People who are unresponsive to their environment can be seen to be one of three types of people. 1) Perhaps they won’t concentrate - this is because they perhaps are invested elsewhere, they are distracted by ongoing events in

their life, or uncompleted business that needs to be mentally attended to. then there is 2) those who simply find you uninteresting - this is people who actually find you rather predictable, they think they can judge and work out what you are going to say before you say it, they know your intentions you seem obvious to them - you're similar to a person they have known in the past - perhaps you move too fast and they judge you to be rather nervous, perhaps you speak too boldly and they judge you to be egotistical or perhaps they find you too normal and then find you uninteresting, either way they seem to know everything about everything you're talking about and it’s hardly surprising, shocking, or weird and wonderful. 3) There are just people who find themselves unstimulated by the ideas present, they might not actually recognize that any ideas are present. It’s not that your uninteresting, its that the ideas that you represent are boring. Like you could be an amazing person, but if you are talking about something that they either don’t understand, don’t want to understand - or isn’t related enough to them - then there really is no point talking about it, its too abstract they can’t seem to work out what your saying - your best just keeping it simple. Typically hypnotists, PUA’s, nlpers and persuaders don’t actually address these three groups; instead they just catergorize them as ‘Resistant subjects’ when this is just simply down to the fact they are not willing to change their character and nature in order to get more people onboard, instead they just blame the subjects - or in some cases they may just say that hypnosis or NLP doesn’t work on all people but it simply down to them not

being engaging enough to be able to capture the imagination of people individually. This System is Specific It’s not designed so it can work on the majority of people - its not generalized suggestions in a kind of ‘ one size fits all’ promise, this system is designed that you know how to use it on lots of different types of people to really get an approach and speaking and interactive sequence with people that holds their attention every step of the way that allows you to count every individual compliance test and know when people are moving with you or are moving away from you - people say well isn’t hypnosis risky, like you can’t do covert hypnosis because there is a huge risk of getting caught - but if you look at a girl in the eyes and tilt your head while accidently touching her stomach as you spin around an angle and lightly accidently touch her stomach, you have ran a lot of tests and you can immediately tell if she is emotionally reactive with you. And thus if the system is working, if it happens that the system isn’t working then it really doesn’t matter because the sexual capitalism system can be seen as a kind of pre- hypnosis something that occurs even before you do pick up, before you do the interaction, before you even do a kind of ‘pre talk’ a pre explaination with people about what you do and how psychology works. How can we make people superstitious about value. “Almost all elements of learning from experience have elements of superstition, belief in the effectiveness of various strategies or rules are often learned in conditions that make it hard to

distinguish casual causes” ( James G. March, Chip Heath: 1994, p90) So there is a very famous study by Skinner, where he puts a bird in a box, and basically there is a button and what happens is that the button doesn’t actually do anything, its just there is one, and randomly at intervenes food will be released into the birdcage so the bird get’s fed. What happens is though, that occasionally the bird is pressing the button and simultaneously food drops into the box. So the food and the button pressing seem correlated, so what happens is the bird keeps on pressing the button, in order so more food comes out - and of course eventually the food does come out, further causing the bird to keep on pressing the button. It’s like sometimes we have these moments where we suddenly are ready to build new stereotyping ‘cause-effect- models of the world and how the world should work. These happen when suddenly the brain experiences huge structural changes, when the information we think we know about the world doesn’t seem to explain what is suddenly occurring and we experience maybe a laugh or a surprise. If you look back into the sections on the book that we dedicated to the linguistics of humour those sections are there in order to show that when - there is a phrase that means two things simultaneously - the feeling in the brain of all the connections in the connectome (assuming connectome theory is true) suddenly switch from one priorities of pathway - the setup of the joke (the thing you think the story is referring to) then suddenly you discover the joke really meant something else - then you

experience this huge rush of energy released when your neurons all switch around. This novel experience is something we aim to achieve whenever we are talking with our subjects. There are special conditions where people do seem hypersensitive to want to use new predictive models - to want to build new casual relationships of predicting the future and are happily to temporarily take on new learning - in these scenarios the person seems to take every little gesture you do, every little inflex in the voice, every subtle gesture - to mean something - its automatically interpreted and reacted to. Later throughout this closing section we refer to this as emotional reactiveness. There are certain high risk, or high reward situations that seem to cause this reaction, these are; i) false time constraint ii) huge opportunity available (big potential reward) iii) zero opportunity cost because they have become bored of the situation they are in. Let’s just quickly go through a summary what these are; so false time constraint is when you believe an offer is a one time offer, that you only have this moment to decide on whether you want to do something, so take today for example there was a product that I half like - to be honest I don't think I would ever buy this product - but what happened was the product suddenly dropped about 40 pounds in price, that made it 25% cheaper than usual! Suddenly I was thinking about getting my wallet out and buying it.

I know if I tried to sell this product I wouldn’t make more than the price I would pay for it, therefore the benefits of buying it were only for myself and not for financial gain. Yet I fully know that the product would not actually aid my life in anyway - it was simply that I had a short amount of time where unless I made a decision I would lose the opportunity forever. This is similar to the effect you see in nightclubs where people at the end are quick to pounce on each other, knowing that unless they do it then, there might not be another good opportunity to meet someone for weeks if not months. So we mentioned point number 2) Huge opportunity available now this won’t usually work - because sometimes people have the attitude of ‘its too good to be true’ sometimes people can’t seem to connect with a situation that is out of their realm of knowledge, like it doesn’t matter that someone is offered something amazing, like right now if someone phones me up and says “do you want to go Miami?” to be honest I’m not sure that’s possible for me right now, like I’ve got a lot of things going on I struggle to imagine going Miami right now, so I don’t know if that’s actually something that’s possible until its right there in front of my face. Most people can’t actually recognize a good thing until its actually happening to them if people could recognize a good thing before it was happening to them you’d have a lot more people who would be working hard to get to where they want to be in life, but the thing is until you're there you just don’t fully accept that its possible. Look at someone like Donald Trump, people like him put their success down to the fact that they know it is possible because

they have done it before, Donald Trump has lost his billions twice, and now he’s a billionaire again. People say, oh that’s because investors would believe in him, because if he’s done it before he can do it again - thats just untrue, you could easily argue the except opposite using their logic by saying - look if you let investors down once, then they are not going to trust you not to let them down again are they? So the opportunity one doesn’t usually work, unless you give someone a little sniff of what the ‘good life’ feels like first, and then once they’ve felt a bit of what it’s like and suddenly they want more then you can lead them onto it and make a bit of profit out of the interaction - you’ve got their compliance and you can control them a little bit and take them where you want to go with it. Now theres some people who hate their lives, 3) these aren’t the same people who hate their lives in the other section mentioned earlier on in the book necessarily. it’s not really like that. No we are referring to people who just don’t find the environment they are in stimulating, so often you see them reacting to things going on around them - they seem to have their eyes on the room rather than have their eyes on where they are currently at - what they are currently involved with they have their eyes on the opportunities flying by them. In the approach outlined we sometimes refer to these as the people on the ‘edge of the circle’ its these people that are getting ready to jump ship but don’t know how. By finding people with absolutely nothing, and offering them something is usually a get out card that they will absolutely treasure to bits.

If you look into the Future-Pace, bait & switch that we describe in this section you will hear about a method that is designed to make people not value what they currently have so that you can cause them to want to switch using this simple psychological method.

How can we cause a good vibe in our lives and environments. You’ve got to keep your life fluid and mixed. I know this can be a lot harder than it sounds, but just try to relax a little bit, push your shoulders all the way back, stand up straight, look straight ahead and breath deeply that will help alot. Now how can we build hypnotic environments around us. Well one thing you need to remember if that you have two ears, and one mouth, you have two eyes, and one mouth. Or let’s put it this way, you have four input devices, and one brain! so try to use the brain a little bit less and instead of trying to judge ‘what's going on’ or thinking about this or that in the future or the past thinking about how the situation isn’t as you expected or whether the situation is as you expected. Instead just watch. this will take a huge amount of pressure off yourself. “The moment you start seeing your life as playfulness, all of the burden on your heart disappears” – Osho” The entire sexual capitalism model came from my experiences during University where I would attend meetings of Street Hypnotists and Pick Up Artists and I realized that 95% of their time wasn’t spent hypnotizing it was actually spend changing venue, looking for a certain type of vibe - none of them knew they were searching for this ‘good vibe’ so I decided to investigate what the vibe was, and how to spot and create it.

You're looking for that place where people have their eyes wide up, and they are seeing life for the first time again with full HD vision on. Be Energetic. You need to realize that many of the reactions that you are looking for in your subjects are not to be found in your subjects they are to be found in yourself. If you act cute, then you tend to find cute girls, if you act sexy then you will find sexy girls, if you act smart then you will find smart girls. What you need to be looking for is to be emotionally reactive, or in your case emotionally responsive but you want to put your energy and focus into being your very best self. When you are out, doing hypnosis or pick up, this is your opportunity to be people facing, I recommend that you see yourself as the club host, a kind of brand ambassador for your brand, or for the club or venue, or establishment you are in. See yourself as a kind of Disneyland and what you are doing is you are there to educate about what makes you different, and to make everyone feel as comfortable and have an as enjoyable night as possible. I used to focus a huge amount of energy into being weird as this seemed to cause people to not treat the situation they were in as mundane, and thus would cause an active learning procedure that would make the person I’m speaking to seem hyper reactive to the information present, but then I learnt about how good it is to be professional, just think about the way you are acting and ask yourself “if I saw this guy on a plane or a train - would I respect him, would I like the energy, his mannerisms the way he leans over - or would I think the guy was a depressed sleaze” try

to get that nailed, and be someone who you yourself would have admiration for and then you will a lot more confident in putting yourself out there and displaying the necessary charisma. It’s all about getting those back areas of the brain working - the bits of the brain that are hyperactive but not just active to use the traditional schemas for understanding the environment, but the motor-cortex responsible for the assimilation of new activities, the learning of new primings and they getting ready of responses, by making new interpretations. In order to do this, not only do you need the person you're speaking to, feel relaxed and un-threatened but you’ve got to make them feel engaged and have their senses heightened, they need to be alert and holding their breath for the next thing you're going to say, like a little stray puppy you need that - follow you around look and attitude, and you want this puppy to be happy and wagging it’s tail, but quick to respond to the ‘sit’ command because it feels food is upcoming.

Overcome yourself, and find that you’re a great persuader. “A Hypnotist is a kind of a hero” I believe ‘flow’ is a true expression of self-actualized form that man could achieve, not only as a philosophic position… but that there was a ‘true nature’ that one had, and the moment one acted, ‘from himself’ rather than ‘from the world’ he automatically acquired wealth from ‘attention to his own masculinity’ and the constant build and artistic development of his soul.

And that instantly he would acquire all the wealth and opportunity in the universe. Weird thing to say right? Not so much. Life only gives you the smallest inch of opportunity, but that inch is enough. (if you constantly expand) There is a very special wavelength, of flow. that any man can achieve. This place is when you take away all the things you don’t want but commit your energy towards, and then put all your energy only into the necessary. This approach might not make you rich, it might not make you cool, it might mean you have zero results… but you don’t care for those things any longer. And the moment you stop caring for those things, and only take control of that seven pounds of soul left. Then you're truly discovered. - so cut out the unnecessary today. Throughout this text - Sexual Capitalism - we focused around the economic nature of man. Where do decisions come from, what makes you competitive or altruistic towards others - and how our successes and failures are governed by this pursuit for value. How financial, material, and artistic goals are defined within your philosophic focus, and then cause the playout of your desires through the marketplace where you express yourself – your friends, your family, your work, your hobbies. and you get the result. What truly makes you happy? How can you be honestly happy? This question is answered from much discussion into Plato,

Socrates and Aristotle, the answer is “Man’s conquering over nature, seeing the results of your personal effort”. To do this, doesn’t mean drinking so much coffee that your ‘wired’ or having so much ‘sugar’ that you can’t taste the cleanness of the air anymore, eating so much that you are tired, no! You are pure, you are sufficient. Real success comes from just working on the process and doing your best, to actually create, to invent and conquer yourself. (See Nietzsche) , to be better than you yesterday by using the information you created, to use yesterday to build today. This is your true form, it’s the natural process, and it’s what sports psychologists refer to as ‘flow’ when you just keep going, when you move throughout a hockey game without thinking, or fight in a boxing match without following the rules of “false hit, false hit, whack him” it’s the moving without ‘being responsive’ to any rule, or any man… without this extra ‘logic’ based on what everything else is doing… the world bends around you. Just seeing out things pan out, is kind of the better way to do many things in life. Let me give an example, you know if you are a fighter, you can’t be a fighter by basing your actions on your opponent, because your opponent has more time to just carry out things, and then you need to block his punch, think through your response, but he’s already just carrying out these punches and moves… you have so little time to actually react, so you're putting yourself at a huge disadvantage and you're very likely to fail. This is what it’s like when you're not in the flow, you push against the supply and demand of life and don’t work with the

opportunities that you have. You’ve got to be better than that, and just be the one who see’s the trend and just goes with it, the trend is your friend… just go with the flow. Because if you're in the middle of a potential motorbike accident, and you don’t slow down time, and be in the flow of the moment while coming off the bike… and truly make peace with the universe, if you don’t do that… then basically you’re a dead man and will be wrapped around a tree or have your head thrown over unexpectedly because of the way you landed. The brain simply doesn’t have the capacity to weigh up complex environments so people most the time just consolidate and switch off everything but their ability to breath, and earn a just above homeless wage packet, keeping their fun levels… just high enough so they don’t actually decide to step out in front of a subway train on 7th avenue at 6am in the morning. They can just about cope with the fun levels, with the interesting enough levels they provide themselves with… that the mind provides themselves with, enough to make life worth living giving their risk reward consolidation decision that their mind calculated. I know nothing about the development of Ebay as a business, but they went from nothing, to being a huge company in a very short space of time by investing everything that they had come to them, into the system. I know guys who have become $100,000 dollar guys in a matter of months of investing $20 a day, then 60$ a day then $2,000 a day into adwords campaigns, by just knowing the exact conversion rates, knowing the probability of someone buying their stuff versus the cost it takes to get someone on their page

and making sure that as long as it costs less for every sale, than the profit you receive from the sale, then you should just sell as many units of that as you possibly can. This is the flow, you don’t think you just do, now I get that for a lot of people reading this article they might be workaholics, geeks, or just people who have never really properly been out before, its just a different mindset and there is kind of a flow for it. Whatever you focus on, is what you get. So if you focus on the person your speaking to – and then they like you. But in order to achieve this you must truly give up all the things you don’t want, and just be.

Create A Service People Would Pay For! I went through this stage of being this ‘crazy guy’ who partied and socialized, and I was kind of ‘on my own thing’ I was producing my own vibe, my own jokes.. Now a lot of pick up training companies will tell you “you’ve got to be yourself”, “you’ve got to make jokes for you, you’ve got to be independent and zero neediness” HELLO! I was completely entertaining myself during that time and got ZERO girls! What why?! It’s simple, people won’t pay for a service that isn’t benefiting them, you’ve got to relate what you are about to the needs of the person you're speaking to, and by identifying that demand is the first step to getting what you want, through framing what you want as a product or service for them. Let’s take another core rule from the text; “You tend to think you rock, but the market thinks you suck!” Do you ever feel like

you should be doing so much better in life? like potential sexual partners should think your so much fitter, more intelligent, more of a good deal than you seem to get credit for? The thing is, are you counting the opportunities you have (the things you haven’t done yet, or the things you did in the past that aren’t relevant anymore… or the opportunities you have that don’t affect your immediate present value) into your calculation of how much credit you should deserve in this moment? Well baby, I think that answers your own question, if you're basing your company, or self based on future potential profit (pipe dream) or based on your past success… you can’t really expect a girl of that inflated price point to go for you, when she is likely showing all of her immediate present value, and not counting the past and the future that she’s considering as important to her character that you’re failing to appreciate. In other words, you are far less cool than you think you are if you use that method of calculating your worth against others who you calculate their worth based on what is immediately visible.. “How emotionally available she seems”, “how well dressed she is”, “the quality of her makeup”, “her ability to communicate coherently”.

On-Screen Attraction: It’s the environment that creates the vibe. There’s lots of buzzwords and phrases that we could easily say, but you’ve just got to be the one that brings someone up if they feel down. You’ve got to create scenarios that doesn’t ask someone to “Method act, and act like you fancy me” but creates

a scenario that makes fancying you the only response that feels right given the scenario. Look at it this way, if you get a girl in bed, she’s going to feel like maybe there is a sexual tension in the room… and that is because she wants to ‘get with you’ or ‘be with you’. But this vibe in the room isn’t because of that, it’s just a economic thing that forms the solution “go out with him” as the set of associations, action response sets to do… So the moment you accidentally brush past her, she might go to kiss you and didn’t actually think about kissing you, it wasn’t planned or coordinated it was something that she just did spontaneously. This is what the central command will do if you can create an environment that makes someone be a method actor without knowing that they are one, that makes someone put on their own best impression of “just pretend your my wife” but without having to ask them to pretend they are your wife. Like in the old movies when two spies are entering a hotel, and they ask to rent a hotel room and the receptionist says “you're both married” and they both say “yeah I’m Mr and Mrs [second name].”And then instantly you feel the on-screen attraction between the two film characters, you suddenly feel as if there is real physical attraction, true love going to happen. The situation is the one that makes her feel like she’s in love with the dude, not the actual rationality of whether it’s a logic situation to be with this guy… people don’t have the mental capacity to make ‘logical decisions’ their brain is asleep, it needs to wake up to see the wood through the trees, and suddenly being in an amusing situation like the one with the hotel receptionist is enough to bring those creative resources back

online, to really take in the information and create processes, beliefs and cues from the situation. We are not surprised when a two-year-old looks at a dog and says “doggie!” because we are used to the miracle of children learning to recognize and name things. Kahneman, D. (2011:15) it does not take a genius; to realize that the infant has little or no working memory and that this recall process didn't require conscious input.

Don’t be too picky - if Opportunities were obvious they would already be taken. Life is much simpler when you just go with the flow, when you just do what the trend wants you to do, and give the people what they want rather than fight against them…. You will be repaid far more. If a girl fancies you - but she’s not your type. Why turn her down, its just money left on the table? But then consider this on that note if you wouldn’t turn down a girl who was trying it on with you even though you don’t fancy her - then what difference would it make to try it on with a girl who you don’t fancy? What so just because she was the one who initiated and even though you don’t fancy her - then it’s accepted to get with her - but you wouldn’t be the one to talk to her if the scenario never occurred? Well that makes no sense, you’ve got to be the guy who is out there making a difference and actually making things happen in his life Take the example of a guy who says… “Oh, I would get with her but she’s not my type… it would be nice to have a girlfriend

though” you hear this alot… this guy really needs a girlfriend, he should just get with her, it’s the best decision he could make, and besides it’s a learning experience… what’s the worst that can happen? In the end he will come out with more knowledge and a richer experience base from which he can draw future decisions from. And chances are - he will often actually end up really liking the girl. Take this example; I used to teach a lot of pick up artist courses and what I found was that I would ask students with whom I spoke to on the phone I would say “How long ago was it when you went up to a girl and approached her and flirted with her” the student will typically say “oh that was about 2 years ago” this was a typical response, and then you would question the student further “so, not had a girlfriend or anything in a while” the student will reply that they haven’t had any girls recently and they don’t know what - then you ask “So who was the girl you approached and flirted with, did you know her?” guess what - nine times out of ten the ONLY girl that he had actually gone up to and spoke to in the last 4 years actually agreed to go out with him and they ended up having a long happy relationship. This is ridiculously common a story. What happens is that guys have this image of perfection of what they want they might have this imagine based on the last girl that they were with or some other kind of thing that gives them an indication of what they think they want - then what they go and do is look for that girl in the environment - now either slowly or quickly the guy encounters problems, he seems to not be picking up any girls -

there seems to be a real absence of women in his life, he can’t seem to find anyone? Does this story sound familiar? This is the same description as ‘flow’ let me explain the process of writing this book - this final chapter of the book has taken me on and off about 4 months, if not an entire year? Why has it taken so long just to do a final chapter? Well, its because its the final one - its that when this chapter is complete then the book is finished and I can publish it. So everytime I step up to write this final chapter I have this big sense of - “I’m going to stay up all night tonight and finish this book” this wanting to completely finish the entire book in a day. Of course what happens is I start looking through the book, I feel the immense pressure - I wonder why my ideas aren’t very creative and I have writers block - I just want the writing I write to be amazing, to have that magical day where everything is completely perfect and I just come out with all the right words and ideas and the whole book just becomes completed as if by magic. There was one day this summer where I was writing some of my book - and I was sitting at the computer annoyed that I didn’t seem to be making any progress on my writing, I was looking at the screen and I was reading through my words and I was experiencing writers block. A friend calls me up and he offers me the opportunity to go cliff diving, - what we would do is go and climb over a fence into an Abandoned Quarry and jump off the cliff - there would be about 20 girls going he said - and it is a beautiful sunny day outside (not very common in England) so the best thing to do would be to leave the computer writing task and instead go cliff jumping with my friends.

Now I know I’ve got the ability and mindset to jump off a 120ft cliff and dive into a lake. I know I should be able to do that. But the thing is, when what you want doesn’t match up with the environment you are in then you simply cannot carry out the activity you are trying to complete - you have to force yourself to do it. Your heart and soul isn’t into it because your goals aren’t aligned. See, it’s like me saying that I want to be the next justin bieber well that idea isn’t as bad as these guys who are looking for a certain type of girl. The thing is, your opportunities that you have belong to you. You know it’s not that you can’t get a really gorgeous girl - it might just be that the way you are is in the way, or perhaps you're not meeting enough people, but to simply turn down good opportunities is just backwards. Just think of it this way, just say to yourself that every time god offers you an opportunity right in front of you - if you turn it down, then god like friends, is going to stop inviting you to the party - if every time you're offered to go to a party you say “nah I’m busy” then eventually you’ll stop getting invited - at first because people don’t think that you want to come and eventually you’ll stop being invited because people will think it would be awkward if you did come. Eventually you won’t even know how to act at parties, and you won’t know how to have conversations with those old friends. Well the same happens with these opportunities that god passes you - if you stop taking them then he simply won’t offer you anymore because he doesn’t think you want those one’s he will be too busy searching for the exact opportunity he thinks you want that he won’t be able to keep offering you ones because he will be too busy trying to work out exactly it is that you do want.

Quick Tips on speaking to girls. Now we would like to cover how to create a personal connection with your audience in these environmental situations. How should you speak to a girl? Or gain someone’s interest and turn this into a phone number, a kiss, or more? In this section we are going to discuss the following five tips in greater detail; 1) Be cute: positive and happy traits like that you see in an infant invokes a evolutionary response to want to nurture this person. Personality traits like: playfulness, curiosity, innocence and affectionate behaviour. So this means smiling, a real lasting smile, and making eye contact with people and talking about your life, and the people around you in a positive way. 2) Be aware who is into you: Who is giving you that ‘look’ who do you ‘lock eyes with, who is standing close to you. Who plays with their hair or grooms themselves around you. 3) Always be indirect: Never admit you fancy someone directly. Say stories that promote conversation, that misdirect attention away from the escalation of touch, eye contact etc. without giving away you like them. 4) Use touch early on: If someone accepts your increasing touch while you interact with them. Then they probably like you, especially if they touch you back. 5) Talk to everyone: Even if it’s just about things that are going through your mind, be interested in other peoples opinions, ideas, experiences and lives and they’ll more likely value yours.

Gain emotional investment from people by escalating without getting caught. Attraction only exists after she has hugely invested in you, only then do you have a complete monopoly over the choices she has. Once she’s sent you a ridiculous amounts of text messages, spent a massive amount of time. She doesn’t consider any other man an option, but she considers you her only option. This is the problem we have we have this initial situation where we are in this perfectly competitive market and from this position we want to move with the girl through this sequence to a place where you’re in love. So how do we do this? The way we do that is through escalation without getting caught. Seduction is like a little wedge, that you get in there from building responsiveness, but once someone is complying to you, it’s pretty much guaranteed that when you put another test of compliance in front of them they are likely to respond to it. Getting someone focused, getting them interested, you just want someone’s attention and the longer you have their attention, the more locked in they are to you and the less they are to every other competition. But the problem is people are going to blow you out initially if they think you're trying to steal their value, their utility from them. If people think “oh the only reason he’s talking to me is because he thinks I’m hot” then you don’t chance, whether it’s a guy or a girl, if you approach Richard Branson he’s going to be thinking “What does this guy want an autograph or money?”

They are just going to blow you out, they have no responsibility to you something, it doesn’t help them in their life to give you something, its no benefit to them, and they’ve got a billion other people to give stuff to, why would they pick you? But if you're further down the conversation, if your friends with them a week later then they are in a much more locked in position to give you money, and you might only be in a small group of people who has that opportunity at that point, the probabilities change with every single test with every single moment that you're speaking to someone. And this is the truth, the truth that many aren’t ready to hear, there is no hypnosis, there is no ultimate PUA technique, the truth is that you can soft calibration any moment and you can pace and lead any response onto the next moment to increase the responsiveness further. For example; this evening I was sitting in a booth on the edge of a dance floor, a girl was standing leaning against the edge of the booth, I said to my friends to move along as to allow her to sit down, I told her to sit and she sat in the newly allocated space. This was her passing compliance test number one, leaning across my friends to talk to her I took hold of her hand and pulled her so she was leaning across the table to speak to me, I asked “what’s your name”. (compliance test number 2) I then pulled her across my friends so she had to climb over them so she was sitting on my lap (compliance test number 3), I tilted my head and she tilted in response (mimicking my social learning, this was compliance test 4) I kissed her. Many would argue that there is a difference between compliance and responsiveness. However I would argue that both require her attention, and both involve her committing to an activity

derived from you, it’s just the term compliance often implies someone had a ‘conscious process’ that eventually resulted in them mentally selecting whether to comply with you. Whereas responsiveness implies there was no mental choice selection process. I would argue that all choices are made based on what seems like the best option available at the time and are allocated automatically based on value without any kind of conscious choice mechanism ever coming into play even if the target feels like they did consider it a choice. There's no magic attraction switch in the brain. If you ever ask someone whether they are attracted to you (before they are in love with you) they will always answer no.

Number #1 tip on how to be more good looking: Look groomed & act cute! Looking groomed and acting cute is really something that can make such a gigantic impact of the impression that others have of you. Before we explain in this section how you can go about making yourself feel more cute, and suggest what ‘looking groomed’ means we are first going to mention some of the features that would make you cute; - Ensure that your eyes are wide open and you're ‘taking in the world’: what do I mean by this, I think you need to start looking people in the eyes again. I get that during worklife and a lot of situations its actually rude to directly look someone in the eye this might not be something you’ve heard about or have spoken about, but often it seems a little too personal and revealing to make eye contact with people - whether people reading this realize it or not there is actually a lot of circumstances where looking someone in the eyes is really not a good thing to do.

But when you are meeting people and your wanting to make a good impression; or you're wanting to influence people then using eye contact during the opening moments can often be a significant part of the approach that you should consider. - Unbridled smiling - so this means smiling with a kind of uncontrolled ness as if you just smile because you do and you can’t really help that you're smiling, you're smiling because life is good and you feel happy and there is nothing that you can do about it. Why does this work - well people are looking for people who seem kind of genuine, not only that but people often are attracted towards value and if you seem happy then it seems its because you have or know something that they don’t know in their own lives so they will move towards you because you seem like you're doing great and they’ll want to feel the benefits of that. - Innocence - Now this might seem a little contradictory to the knowledge that you will find in pick up artist books, they will tell you that you need to be dominant when talking to people because this communicates that you are an alpha male and have leadership qualities. Well those guys are kind of right, but you need also to be innocent, let me explain the people who achieve great things in the world often aren’t the smartest of people often they are just the people who believed it was possible or thought it could be possible and went out to do their very best to try and make it happen regardless of whether there was information they didn’t know about or consider - they were just innocently en-passioned. You know most things aren’t really great ideas, they aren’t business ideas that sound good on paper - its just that one man can really build an empire just through his good spirit and his ability to see positives through the negatives, maybe this is a bit innocent or naive - but it doesn’t really matter

if it works out for the guy. He’s built something from nothing through his pure focus to make the best out the situation that he can. Affectionate behaviour - Often when people just are a person who isn’t a thinker but instead is the type of person who takes action you will see them carrying out activities such as touching things. They will be the kind of person who instead of wondering what something is, they will go up and ask the thing “what are you?” instead of sitting with problems they work out solutions, they are the kind of person to go and touch and prod something they find curious or peculiar. If you like a girls dress you should touch it and compliment her on her dress, if you like someones jacket you should touch their jacket while mentioning that its nice -doing this touch while speaking about someone will confirm your point and make you come across more genuine. Another tip that is important to consider is Playfulness - which could be defined as finding the fun in the moment. As you get older in life you tend to become a little cynical about the world you stop trusting people, having faith that projects and ideas will come off, you even start to not even be sure of your own sexual turn ons - because you don’t express them. You look on Facebook - and everyone seems to be writing the same statuses “Spending the evening with the boyfriend” and that sort of thing - and you think “Really?” Sorry now I’m coming across Cynical, but I want to point out that I don’t believe that people are really that similar that we should all be living this kind of standardized life.

There will be people out there - who have the same passions and interests as you - it’s just they ‘like you’ haven’t had a chance to express themselves, and have lost track of what they believe in and stand for. I remember when I was a kid. I’m not saying that I was mega happy or anything - but I definitely just did whatever I felt like, and because of that my character and identity was a bit more rounded. As an adult - maybe it’s just me - but I’m constantly aware of my restrictions - the things I can’t do. Eventually there are so many restrictions it’s not even about what I can’t do anymore - I don’t seem to know what I want to do. I know part of my job writing this book is to be inspirational - so I don’t like sometimes to destroy the Vince Lynch image, but I have weaknesses, like others reading this. You’ve just got to have faith and hope that - everything will be ok - because your from this moment onwards - only going to do what's necessary and best for you. “Let no one ever come to you without leaving better and happier. Be the living expression of God's kindness: kindness in your face, kindness in your eyes, kindness in your smile.” ― Mother Teresa

Grooming: what it takes to appear well kept. People have kind of a template for what a person who is looking after themselves is like - and this communicates, health, good genetic heritage, kindness to loved ones, charity, ability to generate profit & opportunities.

In order to come across - well groomed - it often means that you just need to look like you ‘look after yourself’ on a daily, regular basis. For example, if your sideburns aren’t equal - then it might be that you have poor attention to detail, if you have hairs growing out of your ears - then you need to wonder ‘why haven’t you looked in the mirror at your ears in years?’ or ‘Why hasn’t a loved one told you or groomed you’. These lack of grooming are warning signs to potential partners. Instantly it kills any hope of attraction. Because it means that all the qualities you need to display in order to attract a mate - or often even just to attract supporters in business, to make you more persuasive - well you’re just ignoring the key variables that can make the biggest impact to your success. I’ve been the guy who has wanted to go into business meetings and said “Why do I need to shave? I can look however I want - I should spend more time making sure the quality of my ideas is as succinct as possible rather than wasting it on - grooming.” I’ve said that kind of phrasing alot! And I’ve spent enough time with people who are pretty good at doing the - getting famous game - or even just pretty good at doing business - and I’ve got to say - that I was wrong! I’ve got a associate who is fairly famous - me and him often would go into important meetings together - he would suggest that I wore a suit etc - even when I didn’t really feel like that was important, I decided to follow his advice - he would always say “Think of it this way, even if your ideas suck.... people are still going to think - man that guy is pretty professional, and has a great image”.

And he would repeat a line that you often hear from salespeople “people mainly buy from you, because they like you - and trust you.” You know when you see these really disgusting old men and women - and you think to yourself - “how do you not know that you are grim?” they clearly haven’t looked in a mirror in years, and I have actually asked these people whether they have actually looked in the mirror and they told me straight that they haven’t looked in the mirror because they are too embarrassed. Arnold Schwarzenegger was a fat kid in school - so what he decided to do was wear tiny t-shirts knowing full well that people would point out that he was fat ugly and disgusting - he didn’t hide the fact that he was fat away from his mind - he didn’t avoid the truth by hoping that no one would pay attention to him - he didn’t shrink into the background of the room so no one would pay attention to him. You know when you show someone the webcam on your computer, or you try and Skype someone or you try and take a photo of someone and they tell you that they don’t do photos then you need to think ‘wow - this person has a serious issue” the most important thing is that you don’t become that person take a look in the mirror and consider what you look like, who you have become - and then think how you want to see yourself - see yourself as someone respectable. Ask yourself; - If I did wear after shave everyday what aftershave would I wear and why would I wear it, what would I like people to say about me after I walk past them?

- If I was to wear clothes that indicated someone I respected, what would I wear? - Ask yourself why someone who claims to be successful wouldn’t have their hair cut into a style, why they wouldn’t have the best hairdresser possible. It’s not that you actually have to do these things in order to be groomed it’s just that most people who have become unkept have some kind of underlying reason why they have become like that. For me for example there was a stage where I really let my health go down the pan - you might wonder how someone can damage their own health. There really is a variety of ways. I damaged my own health because I was deeply unhappy because I compared myself to where I wanted to be in my own life, and because I felt the stress of not been actually at the level where I wanted to be this meant that I let my self deteriorate. It’s never too late to gain your identity back. Don’t worry people won’t make a fuss ! and besides do you really care? the whole point is that you’ve hidden into the background all your life hoping that no one would ever make a fuss and notice you, when really you are a child of god - you are the truth of pure hope and dreams its just your not getting to express yourself because your somehow ashamed of things you’ve done or not done in your life and as a result you're punishing yourself. Stop punishing yourself, it’s just a waste of time, instead just focus on making each second the best one you can make, make each day a positive one.

You know, attractiveness is really just down to how much you look after yourself “Shave your beard”, “have a shower”, “have a walk and build up the odd bit of testosterone”, “get outside a little bit and get a bit of the sun rays on your Face” and how “socially open you are” and then boom you're attractive, you don’t need to do those thing’s as a chore. People see you how you feel your experience of being with yourself. If you're harsh and critical on yourself, then this is communicated to other people as if you're struggling or down and out. If your positive and free open, and just open minded about your experiences with others then they will experience you as capable of going to new places with them. The thing is, just because your open, and she’s open, doesn’t mean anything is ever going to happen. You can be with open minded people about doing business with you, but unless you actually step up and produce output, you actually ask for the business, you actually ask for the relationship… When we trust someone we establish this truth on two things 1) What are their motives? 2) Are they cute? Unless you represent these two qualities, and make yourself readable in these respects then people won’t be able to judge whether you are trustworthy. In order for people to be able to judge your motives - you must be a selfish person who seeks the best opportunities available to you - by being that kind of person makes you predictable.

Now I know some of the egotistical few of you reading this might think - “But I don't want to be predictable”, you might think that being predictable is a bad thing - I can see what you mean - like suppose you're a predictable person and you attend the same household everyday after working a stable job - then what might happen is someone might work out where you live and follow you home and kill you - in that argument it would seem that being predictable is bad. However that’s ignoring the efficiency created by keeping such a simple cycle - the benefits created by fully investing and specializing in doing a simple task. i.e. because the person is repeating the same sequence everyday their earning potential, and their ability to save up money from that routine could be much higher than someone who tries to make money by doing unique activities, i.e. setting up entrepreneurial projects. No, because your selfishly seeking efficiency and thus becoming predictable it actually means that you produce surplus of value that attracts others towards you. For example if in the example above you were followed home from work and killed by someone - it might be that the reason they followed you home was to rob your money - what happened is that your activities about you somehow gave away - made you seem valuable and thus attracted in this case thieves. But you need to weigh up the probabilities. I would bet you the advantages of being predictable by seeking out efficiencies and being selfish - hugely outweigh the loss of opportunity by constantly mixing up your experiences to try and seek out new opportunities that you’ve never seen before. I’ve seen this real trend in many of the geniuses that I know - I know plenty of clever guys and the reason they are clever is

actually their shortfall. These guys are always wanting to learn new stuff and they are always doing the activities that inspire and entertain them - they don’t build businesses that are designed to educate others because by the time these ‘geniuses’ have heard and explored the new idea to the max they are bored of it and start moving onto another project. “these guys” are unable to control their emotions and concentration effectively to dedicate themselves to exploiting the good knowledge they already have - and are more in the business of entertaining themselves by pursuing projects just to make them ‘feel clever’. People need to know that you act in a predictable and logical way. It’s like when you mention that you're going on holiday or leaving the country soon to go travelling for a few months - and you expect that everyone you mention it to is going to think that you're so cool and amazing and is going to thus ‘wake up and admire you’ when instead you get the the exact opposite response. You mention that you're going travelling and suddenly the person you're speaking to seems to withdraw, basically they don’t understand you - they don't understand why you are talking to them, what they are going to get out of it. If you are leaving the country then what good is building a relationship between yourself and them - they don't really care about the relationship that you could potentially build because there is the obvious risk that you are just going to jeopardize it. You know, it doesn’t matter if a girl feels like you're trying to sleep with her that much - providing you're not doing this and not clearly understanding that she doesn’t fancy you and

pushing her and rubbing her up the wrong way - if you see what I mean? What’s worse is when you hide what your intentions are. Where you seem to trap your personality away in a little box and don’t seem to want to give anything a try in life anymore. And that brings us back to cuteness... Cuteness is that little bit of ‘hope’. Physical cuteness, gives rise to astounding benefits that some have dubbed the beauty premium. Attractive people receive more favorable treatment in hiring and promotion and are rated as smarter, more extraverted, more socially skilled and as more effective classroom instructors. If we are not born with cute features - although I personally believe we all are - once I went out with a girl who everyone kept telling me that I was too good for her. however I knew her personal story about why she often seemed a bit introverted, and I felt like her reasons were noble. I felt like against such huge adversity that she had experienced in her life - that she was actually ‘giving life a try’ and actually did have that spark of hope and faith and was ‘going for it’ and for that reasons it made her beautiful, its just that the perception of her from others was that by contrast to their plans, and the way they expressed themselves in public they saw her as not been outgoing and fun. See, looks is all about how you convey it - this isn’t just something that you hear on dating shows, weight loss programs on TV. it’s the actual truth. Even if we are not actually cute, we can easily still create the same ‘imprinting’ response in our audiences by having them pay

attention to our features we deliver an illusion of their size as other features in comparison become distant, less prominent and become background. When you meet people for the first few times - you actually teach them how to interact with you and judge your looks and character. When we meet people we actually see very little about them and probably couldn’t really draw a picture of them if we didn’t have them in front of us to draw a picture of them. What we do is we just learn a few ‘judgements’ about a person we find a few centers of focus that we use, things that make a person stand out and we use these benchmarks and fill in the gaps to discover the rest about a person. If a person seems to be generally smiling when we see them then we assume that they are a happy person - when the reality is you might have just seem them a handful of times where they weren’t really happy they were just having a brief relaxed moment in an otherwise stressful day. “How much do we see? In fact, we see very little, just a few things our attention happens to focus on. Every time we look at something we just pick up a few features and 'recognize' the whole picture from our past experiences and memories. For example, when we enter a familiar room, we do not have to examine every item there to recognize it. We just know what is there and where everything is located. A quick glance is enough. So do we actually see the environment or do we just know 'what is there'? In fact, our perceptual reconstruction (or 'what we think we see') comes from two opposite directions - from outside (environmental stimuli) and inside (mental images we have stored in the brain).

The more familiar the environment or situation, the less we actually perceive it. The brain does not need to process all the stimuli; it just 'fills in the gaps' and 'predicts' the final picture.” Bogdashina (2002) Enough research in evolutionary psychology has been carried out to safely say that, All mammals have a natural evolutionary protective mechanism of ‘infant-mammal-shaped things’ the basic lay out of this is Large eyes, on a small soft round head, which is slightly shorter in shape & length than that of an adult mammals head. This ‘cute’ look can be found in teddy bears, teenage pop stars, infants and some adults who are often seen to be super-physically attractive.

Everything is a compliance test; and you can never be a master of rapport! The real talent that ‘natural’ persuaders and seducers have is an ability to create and recognize who is socially learning from them, and then to escalate their responsiveness by guiding them through a series of tests that are performed without alerting suspicion that he is merely trying to manipulate the target for his own utility means rather than creating a mutual benefit above the cost of her other opportunities. Country to popular belief within the pick-up community, no indicator of interest is ever spontaneous, the reason a girl is looking at you isn’t because she’s giving you an indicator of interest it’s because she’s responding to something you’ve already done. It could be said that every indicator of interest is always a forced IOI. An IOI never comes from nowhere. It’s always a response to something you’ve already done.

What is the look? Leaning in to you, Smiling, Eye contact, standing proximate to you, For example you might walk into a club with your shoulders back, smiling, you slowly scan and make eye contact with everyone in the club you turn away and turn back and every girl turns and smiles at you. To call this an IOI would confuse the term. Because it wasn’t spontaneous, it’s a reaction to you being a source of utility (in this case positive emotion, genetic need to nurture because of cuteness phenomena). You threw out a compliance test, and you checked who responded to the test. These IOI’s were a response to the soft compliance test that you already put out there; you just did a test and observed the results to see who was an eligible fascination candidate. The reality is you have a lot of competitors, more than any other industry you’ll compete in for the rest of your life. Rarely is an IOI really an IOI. It’s more of a reaction, a response. If you know when people are on the verge of listening to you, on the verge of being attracted to you, and on the verge of kissing you, on the verge of being in love with you. You can track their progress through the stages. And push them into the next stage. Typical understanding of the concept of ‘indicators of interest’, might question me and say, Ok, so you mean “When a girl brushes her hair… she’s into me right” Well yes I do mean that “Or when she leans in” Yes, “Or when she goes to touch me or hold my hand” yeah these are all good ways of knowing a girl is into you. But these are after you’ve initiated the interaction and then begun escalating the amount of touch that you’re using on her. You already had her from the moment that she allocated her

attention onto you over all other competing moments for her attention. This is why this chapter is called ‘everything is a compliance test’ because the truth is, everything is. This is the ultimate secret to hypnosis and PUA. The thing that can make you into a freaking god, you wouldn’t believe the things I’ve done if I told you. I used to go freaking invisible to my ex-girlfriend all the time depending how she responded to how I moved around the room, using merely soft compliance. I even did this on close friends. Early in my hypnosis days when I was still a strong seducer, I said to my friend “you haven’t spoken in a while” I pointed to my throat “you know when your throat seals up, like it’s so dry that you can’t even speak and you don’t know why but words just won’t come up” he ended up losing his voice for over a week.

What is ‘Soft Testing’ and how can you use it to judge the hypnotic-ness of a venue? I have a more vague but yet appropriate way of soft testing entire clubs or large venues full of people, and this comes from a technique by a 1940’s to 1980’s famous hypnotist called ‘Milton Erickson’. After a long discussion with myself and another hypnotist Anthony Jacquin, we both agreed that Erickson ‘acted’ like a snake when he hypnotized people, he would bob his head up and down and side to side throughout the pre-talk with a hypnotic subject. - We thought that there was probably something in the ‘head bobbing’ - or ‘acting similar to a snake to hypnotize people’ but we didn’t draw any major conclusions - it was just a brief anecdote.

There’s a popular culture term among people who go out looking for members of the opposite sex at night-time in clubs and bars, called ‘Sharking’ this is where guys circle groups of girls, like the girls are fishes and the guys are sharks. These guys basically wait until they see some kind of responsiveness from a girl and then they then start dancing with them, eventually closing them. Upon seeing & using this technique in order to ‘soft test’ groups of girls and see who was emotionally responsive or reactive to my presence - reminded me of a similar technique I used years earlier when I was a bit of a Goldeneye - Expert on the Nintendo 64 Games Console. In this 3D first person shooter based on the Storyline James Bond: Goldeneye - the film, you in multiplayer mode would have to kill your competitors amongst a fairly large map else they would kill you. These competitors would be other players who were also in front of the TV playing the game against you. I discovered that if you move around your competitors at a circle kind of angle - this would do two things - firstly you would always be on their side. (as they turn to try and shoot you), secondly when you saw an opportunity to get closer you could merely bend the trajectory of the circle to swing closer behind them, and swing out as appropriate. If you did this swinging perfectly you could ensure you were always at an Angle where you could move quickly and would never put yourself at a position where you could be shot - You would repeat this circle attack over and over until the competitor would have no choice but to break your circling of them (as being in the circle makes them vulnerable) and instead they will

move away to run from you (at which point they are a perfect target to gun down). The point is, by circling people, they really have two choices - to continue to let you have the upper hand while you circle them, or to break the sequence of you circling them and leave themselves vulnerable to attack. (at they would now be moving in a straight line)

Soft Testing & The Eb & Flow of Magic. The psychology of magic, mainly refers to doing techniques under a guise that is a moment. It’s where you have changed the moment of attention so that everyone else is looking for a causality occurrence to occur in a certain moment rather than another. The reason my competitor moved in Goldeneye, was because they believed that providing they moved they would likely be able to shoot me, but I had already pre-anticipated where they are likely to move, and therefore they step into my line of fire. That is to say, the moment of attention is focused on when I began circling them which they presume to be my attack, in response they decide to attack me, which is the moment when my real attack is carried out. To sum up this concept, is like to explain why a successful war strategy is better than the one of its competitor. It’s a difficult thing to explain, but I believe examples from card magic make this easier to understand. For example imagine that I’m performing a card trick on you. In this trick I might show you the back of a single card, and ask you to name any card. I briefly show that the card you named is

nowhere to be found in the deck, I show you this by spreading the deck, I show you this by leaning forwards and thumbing through the cards face up. I then lean back (the off beat) and relax at this moment I switch hands and switch the single isolated card for the card you named. I then delay, lean forwards and turn over that one card to reveal it to be your card. This creates the illusion that I knew you card all along. This happened by using the offbeat to do the dirty work of switching the card. I’d like to continue to explain this metaphor about magic, into the realm of seduction in the comfort stage of the interaction. When you place your arm round a girl, if she knows that you’re on purposely putting your arm around her because you want her, or if you get caught holding her arm etc. - this will likely convey that your ‘interested in the girl’ - and will ‘get in the way’ (or distract) her from her own process of discovery, her own warming to you - her growing need for you. Therefore the classic way to get around this is, like what you see guys do in the cinema, they might lean over to get some popcorn, or yawn and as they do they raise their arms above their shoulders and put them around the girl as they relax, as if by accident. That is to say they increased the amount of kino in the interaction by escalating the kino during an offbeat. I was talking through the idea of snaking with a friend. And I mentioned that I was utterly convinced that it had something to do with onbeats and offbeats. And I was discussing what references in magic there were, and of course the book absolute magic and pure effect by Derren Brown came up and Strong Magic by Daryl Ozitz came up.

I was saying how its such a shame that there seems to be many books alluding to their being a psychology of magic but they never say exactly what it is. They mainly talk about moving the moment, moving the causality of the effect around, and using delays and relaxation moments during effects in order to switch a deck of cards for another deck of cards, or do a move such as switching a packet of cards for another packet. All of which are advised to be performed during the offbeat. However that begs the question “How do you create an offbeat?”, this is something that is never explicitly discussed. The way to create an offbeat, is to create a moment, an onbeat, then the offbeat will naturally follow immediately afterwards, attention comes in short packages and ends suddenly. Like the guy who puts the girls attention on him reaching to grab the popcorn or the yawn places her attention on that, the following moment off the back of that is where the offbeat is where he can increase his level of kino escalation. The same can be said in the early stages of attention, for example when you initially capture someone’s interest. Perhaps you want to lock eyes with a girl in the bar, you can’t simply just lock eyes with her, that would give away your game, it would look like it’s entirely planned, however you might be clearly and obviously looking for a friend and as you look for your friend you lock eyes with your target. The snake technique is similar in many respects to all of the metaphors mentioned. When you move around a nightclub you should never move in a straight line. You should move around like a snake.

What this does, is it creates onbeats, moments where you appear to be almost approaching someone, when you’re not really, you're simply just wandering the venue, and then just as you get close to them you move off in the other direction as you continue the path of the zigzag. This creates a moment of ‘onbeat’ where youre approaching, and offbeat when you're moving away. The girls who are responsive to you will watch you as you begin moving away but blank you as your moving close. These girls who are hyper responsive to your progressive absence, are somewhat interested in you. They could be said to be indifferent to your charm, something about you has opened a doorway to them. (Indifferent is fine in persuasion - actually your not looking for the big response you're looking for that process of - going with you - rather than “no!”... don’t encourage anything that might cause a big “no!”) In addition to the movement of you in the club, this pulsing and vibrating of getting closer to people then further away as a kind of indirect test. I used to regularly refer to a ‘movement’ I was never entirely sure what I was referring to but I told my friends “make a big move and see who watches” so I might begin speaking loudly and then quietly to see who looks over, or I might just randomly lift one arm up in the arm and wave pretending I’m waving to someone but I’m not actually waving to anyone to see who takes notice. These big movements create an onbeat when people pay attention to you, followed by a moment where the dirty work happens, where you check who is keeping on your track, and then you can make an approach over to that person under the guise of something else and strike up an interaction.

You use your ability to misdirect the attention of the target to ‘shroud over’ your escalation exercises. By doing this you can engage the attention on focusing on a story, while you engage in touch, or eye contact that is hidden as elements of the story rather than looking like you're attempting to pick up the girl. If she notices that you're attempting to pick her up, she will be focused on that, and it will feel as if you are the one that is pushing her through the stages rather than her discovering her feelings for you. One method of ‘shoulding’ or creating a misdirection is to use a intense signal of emotion on your part that dictates their response, for example after the sponge ball disappears from the magicians hand if the magician appears genuinely astonished that the sponge ball isn’t there then the audience might perceive that the sponge ball has genuinely vanished! The way a magic trick works or the way tasting what a cup of coffee tastes like or how high a step is the same reason why you’re going to get girls after reading this. It’s not the trick that makes the magic; it’s your expression in the moment where there is a void in the mind of the spectator who is expecting a conditioned reality causality path to occur that causes the reaction, if you look disappointed then the audience members become disappointed as they watch your reaction because they assume that’s part of the reality being as they have nothing else to expect. They look to you to ‘learn’ about something they don’t know about yet, this is called ‘social learning’ or ‘imprinting’ this how we learn language, the association between mummy and daddy. When you take a sip of a drink and you expect it to taste like one drink, and then you realize its not that drink you're drinking

something else, exists a moment where the drink tastes like nothing then it slowly changes into the taste of the drink that it really is. We have anchors, and triggers that define our sense of being in one place as opposed to another, that trigger our reactions. To go back to Erickson’s use of the snake, I imagine from watching videos of this famous hypnotherapist and from the conversations that I’ve had with others who have mentioned that they gain some benefit from knowing about this, that Erickson would bob his end up and down and side to side during the pre talk with his therapy clients. And when he noticed his clients respond by bobbing their heads and whatnot he would proceed to hypnotize them. I’ve noticed this same effect by watching the interaction between girls and boys who suddenly become attracted to one another. If you take notice of girls and boys. Each of them have their own bodily rhythm like the way they move their hips, compared to their torso. I’m not necessarily referring to dancing but their entire body when moving, or standing. Think of them as like a snake that rattles its body. When someone is attracted to you, they rattle their body to the same rhythm that you rattle yours and suddenly you feel attracted or hyper responsive to them. If you want to attract someone as you move around a venue in the snake like zig zag fashion you should be aware of your bodies rattle, and the body rattle of girls you spot who you would like to seduce. When you spot a girl you might like to acquire, you should move your body in the rhythm that she moves. And then you will have her into you.

When you speak to guys who are natural seducers, they often tend to claim that it ‘all comes from the hips’, that there reason for seducing all the girls, or guys is that they are great dancers. At many times in my life I understood what this meant, and at other times I hadn’t got a clue what these crazy loons were going on about. When I didn’t understand, I made the mistake of assuming these guys meant that they would always ask girls to dance, and therefore that would be their special technique that would get a relationship going with the girl. The times when I understood EXACTLY what these guys were referring to, is when I knew about the ‘light’ and the ‘snake’. Dance isn’t about what you do when you're holding onto a girl, we are all constantly dancing. When we walk, when we talk, we have a rhythm. A great dancer tunes his rhythm so that he always has a partner, when partner takes the role of the male and takes the lead, and the other member takes the role of the female and follows the dance. Kissing is an ideo motor response. A kiss is only genuine when it isn’t pre-planned. It is the levels of mimicking, ioi’s, rapport and compliance that lets you know that your 100% certain you will get a kiss close. Without these things, the answer is, no she’s not ready for a kiss close. And if she is complying with you, then whatever you (pace and lead) her into she will 100% fall into. Knowing this will allow you to realise that people are ready for a full close far before you or they would recognize it to be called anything like attraction. Because it simply isn’t attraction.

After being a teenager for several years and constantly having the urge to feel attracted to people (because of a hormone imbalance coupled with the new freedom to interact with strangers) As we progress into adults we lose the ability to feel this lust for everyone (of the opposite sex), we become so used to spending time with others that we forget that kissing could always happen. We kind of become immune to attraction except under ‘special circumstances’. Attraction is what happens during this ‘special circumstance’ it’s a gentle guidance of a feeling of excitement, matched with fascination for someone, guided by mimicking their body language cues. All attraction begins with a kind of ‘fascination compliance’, rather than directly ‘she’s begging for it’. The job of a seducer or persuader is the ability to progress others through stages towards our goals without alerting them of our intentions, via elegant distraction.

Compliance Tests & Micro Calibration Once you've used the techniques to create a New Frame in someone’s mind, or if you want to test whether someone was already responding to you, its importance to run some compliance tests. These tests often not only have the effect of testing to see if someone is responsive to you, but often build responsiveness. You can, point and ask the person to stand over there, (indicating with two fingers) where to stand, instead of where they are. And see if they respond and stand in the exact same

spot. If they do its likely that they are hypersensitive to your rules, and therefore likely to accept more ambitious suggestions. I've noticed that when you ask someone to cut a deck of playing cards, that you can first indicate how to cut them off, and if the individual you demonstrated this to, cuts off the exact same amount of cards (just a rough guesstimate) then they are once again hypersensitive to your rule setting, and unconsciously treat it superstitiously. You can, when going for a handshake, (or just in conversation) leave their arm in an awkward position, hanging in the air, and see if they leave it held in that position even after you've walked away. If they have then it would seem they've treated your implied reality superstitiously. Many magic routines such as, Think of a color? (nearly everyone says red), think of a number between one and ten (nearly everyone says seven) only work on individuals who are quick to respond to your suggestion, and take their first thought of number or color as rule. This quick decision making in response to your requests, demonstrations their hypersensitivity. As opposed to individuals who on purposely try to think of a complicated number or color to dupe you (such as nine and pink). If you ask them to look at something, or pass them something, like your business card, you watch how long they look at that single item for without their attention flickering onto something more emergent. If they treat what you suggest with a degree of undivided attention, then their attention is hyper-directed by your priming. This is similar to how pickpockets, manage to steal your wallet!

“In everyday life Professional pickpockets make use of directional cues by bumping into a person or stepping on toes to direct attention to the spot bumped on or stepped on, and away from the pocket (Nardi,. P. 1984 p8) through the initial interaction of attention they can guide the awareness of the subject to a series of events that leads the victim to believe that they were merely bumped into rather than robbed! Another way of moulding the attention of a subject can physically hold them by the shoulders, occasionally pressing down, and seeing if they move their shoulders down with your subtle request. One way seducers, hypnotists and magicians do this is they may guide their participant around the venue, and do this compliance test throughout the motion. There are more general compliance tests that can be noticed throughout all your interactions; these are noticing those that copy you, that seem to use the exact same words, phrases, facial expressions, or even the overall mindset and philosophies that you seem to hold they almost seem to mimic. You may find that they stand in a similar manner or that they use the same body language. When individuals respond to these tests, then they are responsive to your social proof.

Health: Don’t eat too much, don’t drink too much - cut all the excess in your life of everything. You might not physically have it within you. In that case then you will need to perhaps make several changes, to your sleep habits, your sugar and caffeine intake, you might have to go see a doctor and have some medication prescribed if you struggling to stay awake.

I believe every human is unique, and therefore needs a unique treatment. However there are some things you need to take into consideration before you start self diagnosing yourself with all kinds of problems. Do you eat chips/crisps? do you eat chocolate bars? Do you eat fatty food? Do you know that even with Good quality food your body spends 40% of the energy it consumes directly into breaking down that food that you consume to produce energy? and that’s assuming the food you eat is both easy to break down and nutritiousness. Do you know that everytime anti-oxidants convert glucose and oxygen into energy it causes anti oxidants to break down the length of your genetic string to actually reduce the time you live on this planet. So, if you consume a bag of potato chips with zero nutritious value not only are you not consuming decent food, but you are spending the energy you’ve managed to build up, on breaking down food that can’t be broken down… you’re killing yourself twice over. Honestly, you may as well just literally kill yourself, you're literally doing exactly that.. what your doing is just as bad as smoking. Most people I meet have this weird relationship with their own sense of self where they are constantly either too awake or too asleep. You know the feeling of waking up in the morning and needing a coffee or a cigarette to ‘get you going’ but then you go to work and then you take another coffee and then you feel too wired, so then you need some food to ‘calm you down’ but then after lunch all you want to do is fall asleep and you're finding your doing no work.

The moment you cut out this up and down process of consuming things are bad for you, all this heartache of being too tired or too awake just disappears. People in nightclubs, bars etc have the exact same problem… they are either too awake, or too asleep, too drunk, or too sober. They are the ones who have this poor relationship with their own bodies, it's your responsibility to be the strong one, to be the one who feels the pace of the person you're speaking to and therefore communicates a sense of balance as a contrast to their unbalanced world.

Forced Reinterpretation If a girl; considers that your cute; Then you can add something else to that mix of perceiving your cute, providing she focuses on that task of you being cute for some time i.e. the mental software is still switched on before she moves onto another task. In other words - if you are ever guaranteed that someone is experiencing something i.e. that they have some mental software running - then because you're sure they are definitely experiencing something then there is nothing to stop you saying things related to what they are experiencing, saying things that take the concept of the pre-activated state - which in this case is ‘cute’ and take that state to another level - a destination where it would benefit you. Then you should aim to use the mental software running as a bridge to where you want to be. Whenever someone experiences this information clash - of two concepts banging into one another - where in this case you might cause cute and sexy to be related - what happens is that the information causes a ‘forced reinterpretation’ if you think back to the humour section of the book we hypothesize that when two

opposing states bump into one another - what happens is that all the information in the connectome has to realign. What happens is that the brain suddenly causes a huge rush of some kind of energy source - and suddenly the person goes into a learning state where they are hypersensitive to taking on board new information. For example if a girl is considering you to be cute, then this would be a good opportunity to ask when you might be seeing each other next. (realize that this might just be a brief moment in time - like a girl might think you're cute or have a general sense of you being cute - but she hasn’t addressed it in her mind as a thought yet - in a few moments this schema might no longer be activated - thus you need to notice these brief moments, or assume these brief moments and take advantage of them.) By doing this depending on her version of how she perceives you to be cute, will cause the two to be connected “he’s cute” with “seeing each other next?” which will have her visualize an empty slot in her schedule or perhaps engage with the scenario of doing something together. The mind has an ability to look for zero-sum mathematical games; and focus its attention and focus on it. Everyday I’m emailed with questions such as “How can I make her love me?”, “How can I make my boss like me?”, “I couldn’t hypnotize this guy” and they expect me to explain why the relationship formation they had wasn’t functioning like a team – and how they now feel at economic loss because they can’t carry on the path towards their goal pursuit – a higher utility. Talking about love; creates love schemata – the idea of love – when someone is lonely is a powerful emotion. At times we have

different drives; our career can be are foreground and love can be in the background; but with the right conversation, a carefully played piece of music, can que us and suddenly love can become our foreground. If you want someone to fall in love with you; then focus on the fact that we all have a powerful desire to be nurtured – and we rarely receive that kind of attention in other words “You fall in love with whoever falls in love with you enough to nurture and care for you”.

Act like a caricature of someone you would respect: Be the Idealized Heroic version of yourself. Individuals strive for consistency of themselves an ability to tell optimistic stories. These stories, these response sets of opinions and values tend to exist in clusters that are internally consistent. Whereas two clusters might contain values that are inconsistent with each other. The same kind of consistency exists between what a person knows or believes and what he does. That is to say, people believe in what they do & vice versa. (Leon Festinger: 1957) Your opening conversations, teach the other person, primed anchors about how to characterize you. “I'm older than brad Pitt, but I’m younger than Mick Jagger”, “I love meeting new people from all around the world” this could be described as Demonstration of Higher Value in PUA literature, but really its just been positive about yourself and others. “People Like Positive People” Robert Caldini: (2005)

When individuals bargain with one another for power, the one who admits they need something the most loses, and the other one feels more powerful. Not only do these techniques work on girls! But they work great in other contexts with men too. I recommend that you make an effort to be an excited admired person in every social context, not just for attraction. When you get into conversation with the person you want to speak to, it is crucial to present yourself in an attractive light and positive light. As long as your positive in every phrase you use, you'll sound great “this place is really cool”, “that jacket is great”, “Lets get some amazing drinks”, “Wanna see a cool magic trick, my friends love this trick”.

Emotional reactiveness What is emotional reactiveness, I feel like we might have covered this a lot in the material that is covered in this book, but I really feel that more and more this has become an important element of my life. If you don’t understand what the look of someone who is reactive and responsive to the on-going emotional impact and vibe of the scenario around them, then you’re really going to calibrate to the fluctuations of emotions that a subject goes through in response to you while you’re talking to them. People think recognizing something is like a passive movement, and sounds protective or conservative and not about going out there and making something of the world, however they are kind of incorrect, research, analysis, and careful planning really can be an aggressive strategy…

For example, you might be unable to compete on direct keywords on Google, but then what you can do is go long tail and get all the keywords that others didn’t think about, the ones that have really long sentences but people type them in, sure not many people type them in but if you try and get all of those people that all the ‘big guys’ forgot about then perhaps you actually have a chance of winning, optimistic slightly? but it could be done. Dress well, be smart, professional and be in character like how you expect your hypnotic subjects to be, focused but not dry, funny but not a joke. How to get in the mood to make the best evening ever happen; - Leave the house specifically to do hypnosis in mind, you will accept every request, you will introduce yourself to the majority of strangers. You don’t have to do it immediately the moment you enter the busy place, you can do it gradually and spend four hours doing it, but by the end you will have done the entire place. - Look for people who you see something about yourself in them. This is because people like people like them, its ok to slightly copy the bounce of someone’s walk, the way they move to music and similar facial expressions but don’t do that too much else it will look like you are staring at the person. - Be in a really happy but relaxed mood, quietly comfortable, you will find it easier to see out your peripheral vision. You should always have people invest slightly more into you than you invest into them, that means having them watch you more, having them fascinated by you more, copy you more than you do to them.

How to make them show signs of being a good hypnotic subject. What you are looking for when you begin hypnotizing someone is for them to respond to your commands immediately and literally, if I tell someone that their hands might begin to shake then I expect to see their hands move slightly all by themselves, if I tell someone there is magnets on their fingertips I expect to see their fingers move in a way that resembles magnets pulling those fingers together, I expect to see responses even though they are responding to the physical sensation of those fingers coming together because of the muscle tension. It’s usually a sign of a good hypnotic subject is they instantly get these kind of automatic muscular movements or shakes the moment you start speaking to them, a fascinated, compliant or somnambulist type subject will likely copy you, suck up to you, be really nice to you, be a bit too keen to work with you and lots of other things.. That way you know the subject is really attentive, but don’t worry if the person you’re speaking to hasn’t shown any of those signs yet all that means is that you need to be more enthusiastic and encourage their attention and emotions better. Even when a subject is playing along, acting, confused or just listening to me, or even in the pre talk these are vital opportunities to understand whether the subject is picking up on your suggestions or not. A huge portion of the time hypnotic subjects might have misinterpreted a phenomena you’ve suggested to them or whatever reason they just aren’t feeling it or responding to it, and it’s too easy to disregard them as not hypnotized or difficult

to hypnotize because they will tell you that they are not hypnotizable, but simultaneously you should be looking to see if they are responding to at least some of the things you’re saying. One of the early moments in becoming a new hypnotist is really realizing that subjects are always awake, they always have the ability to communicate, and if they want that can kick, scream and complain how they can’t be hypnotized how they aren’t really feeling it and you can walk them through every hypnotic routine on the list while they say it. You don’t own people, and they don’t own you. Please just keep your relationships at arms length, its ok to talk to strangers but don’t suddenly expect to become their best mate immediately out of it. People can be a bit clingy, and honestly if someone comes up to me and tries to be my mate… my number one reaction is to try and get rid of them…. As much as I spend my life with people, I really need my own space, and we all do. So keep your professionalism, and niceness at the forefront of your mind because they are going to be your savours when people start to overreact about your being in their venue. With regards to those who are scared to approach strangers…. Just fully imagine the worst case scenario… suppose you got punched in the back of the head, or suppose the bouncers got you permanently banned from all the bars in the city. Those things could happen… but I want you to realize that they won’t happen, so stop worrying about a girl rejecting you, that’s really the least of your worries.

What is the peaceful moment? A peaceful moment is something that not everyone can have every single day of their life. You need to find that moment of peace, in the eye of the storm - when we mentioned earlier on in this section of the book that when I used to work solidly all week - only then amongst all the hard work and the craziness only then that’s when girls would seem to like me. You know sometimes its like you need to spend time knuckling down and get all your affairs in order, making sure that you are earning, and keeping all of your game as tight as possible and doing this so carefully and so methodologically that you can’t even pop your head up for air. Then suddenly what happens is you take a moment where you suddenly let it all hang out - where you suddenly relax and bring all the resources that you’ve managed to bring together through your long sequence of hard work into one precise moment of power. There is a rush that most people are constantly looking for in their lives, this is some kind of awake but creative and relaxed feeling. What you need to do, is to be some kind of Zen Buddist type figure who is truely grounded in the moment and by being this person you teach those around you to do the same. In the hypnosis approach that we are endorsing from Street Hypnotism.com we use this - bringing together of the moment to create a peace - before we go onto the topic of hypnosis with the subjects who we are speaking to - we do this in order to ensure that the person we are speaking to is capable of laterally understanding the information we present in order so we can inject the idea of hypnosis.

With Covert Hypnosis - we need to place even more importance - we need to be even more focused on ensuring that the person we are speaking to is in this ideal peaceful ‘ eye of the storm’ before we start delivering the suggestions that are going to make sure that they are definitely capable of being open minded enough while aware in order to place the information we state into the right boxes rather than the stereotyped boxes the subject would usually organise information into if we weren’t getting them into this ‘special place’. We have covered this before... but let’s just reliterate in examples; lets put it this way - if you haven’t got them into that special peaceful place and suddenly yu start talkign about how the mind works - you start talking about science and psychology. Well if you do that and they aren’t in the place where they are comfortable and truely at ease with the world then they might easily draw the conclusions that you are.... just trying to show off. Let me explain what I mean - I had a friend who I lent a great deal of money to - especially considering at the time that money was worth 33% of all my foreseable wealth in the recent future and recent past. Eventually after this friend screwed me over in a variety of ways - I had to ask someone - I had to say “How can that guy do that to me? Not only do that to me, but also do it to everyone else around me and not feel bad about it”. Then I was told something that I really thought was quite profound - “When you have Nothing vince, you really can’t think about other people - you are really just trying to keep your head above water - when you are so fucked that there is nothing you can do but lie cheat and steal, you really don’t think about

what other people think about - you just get away with what you can”. It suddenly occured to me, that I was in a very peaceful place in my life and that others around me might not be in this same peaceful place - what you need to do is find these moments where you bring all the hard work and dedication together. Let’s give an example - suppose for months your revise for an exam, you work all day everyday going through your notes, making sure you write them down, maybe you record your voice explaining your notes and then listen to the recording over and over , and then from the recording you make diagrams and pictures - you do what you can to make sure you study as hard as possible. All of this hard work, might have been difficult, you might have had to put off so many other experiences in your life and as a result of putting off those experiences - you felt a huge amount of stress - you felt like it was hard work. But when it comes to the actual examine date - what you likely know is that you just need to be as relaxed as possible almost as if you are actually half alseep but just answering and writing down information from what you know without even thinking about it because the information must exist in there somewhere. It’s this kind of bringing together of all of the information - and issuing through a perfectly relaxed and peaceful state. What is the idea that ‘needs to be’ injected? So basically you are teaching the subject how they need to be interacting with you and what they are going to be doing with their evening, what the feeling and vibe of the place is, what you

can do is set the tone and feel for the evening - so you might say something like “you know when an you just want to have a good time and just let your hair down, how you’ve been working all week and you just want to finally do something for yourself.”. What you can also do is have people really become persuaded by you by using some kind of script like the following - gently introduce the subject to the topic of priming “you’ve probably heard of the phrase, ‘don’t think of a black cat’, and then heard that because you’ve been told of cats that a part of you is thinking of cats right now”, “Like if I say the word cat and have you think of the idea of a cat, you might struggle to name any animal other than cat, because the idea of cats just pops up in your head”. This is like “when someone says numbers to you when your trying to remember a phone number, and you forget and get confused which numbers you were thinking of” or Tell a story about concentration. “You know like when you’re in an exam and that’s all you can focus on, it’s like you’re so focused you don’t notice anything in the room or time passing”. “like if you think about it, and you focus on it, that me continuing to talk about it makes you unable to stop thinking about it, like it holds all your attention, like you feel too energetic about that thing” or One of the ideas that we try and inject is that the ideas that they listen to me present are automatically carried out by the back of their mind - that the phrase “don’t think of purple elephants” actually causes someone to think of purple elephants just upon

hearing it. This is actually true in neuroscience - but we need people to believe and understand it - not in order to make them guilliable enough to fall for it - or not being it’s untrue and by making people believe in it - makes it true? No, someone doesn't need to believe the phrase “don’t think of purple elephants” causes the idea of purple elephants to become primed in their mind - in order for the idea of purple elephants to become primed upon hearing it. The reason is because you don’t want people to misinterpret or ignore the emphasis of the things you are saying - you don’t want people to misinterpret meaning and actualyl mishear what you mean because they are using judgements, and snap thinking to say what they think it is that your thinking of when really your describing something else entirely. By briefly ‘injecting’ the idea that ideas are processed automatically and that decisions come from the back of the brain that are just the easiest ones to think of - and if you have had a conversation about cats - then later on when you are to name a random animal - then its going to be extremely likely that you are going to name the animal cat. Then what happens is, is that the person you are talking to - is more prepared to be influenced, because they kind of understand when they are being influenced - it’s not that you need them to ‘understand’ as in “oh he’s influencing me - this works” - that bit doesn’t matter - you're just trying to signal out to the person - “look the words and phrasing i’m using here when I talk - is not what you think, i’m actually trying to say something far more significant that you can understand right now and you’ll be suprised by what you discover”.

Often when I’m chatting to a new group of people - first I might take an interest in them to get me into their conversation and group and come across like I am non threatening - and then I might let them discover that I am a hypnotist - but not make a big thing out of it - instead let them be the ones who pursue the information out of me - remember its a pull strategy not a push. Now I recognize that me being a hypnotist sparked up their attention and suprise - the situation went from being a mundane one - to a somewhat semi entertaining one. - their creative systems are onboard whilst they are peaceful - this is my perfect opportunity to inject the idea. Please note: that in my other products such as the book “Street Hypnosis” I describe solutions on how to make people more creative - i.e. there might be times where people are peaceful enough to be influenced - but they are not creative enough in order to hear you, so therefore that might require a bit of a script in addition to the advice outlined in Sexual Capitalism. When it’s my opportunity to inject the idea of what hypnosis is and I know that they are listening I might say something like the following: “hypnosis is like, suppose I was to say the word cat, and you think of the word cat and cat related things, like how its furry, and has whiskers, their cute playfulness, you are so focused on that thing, and it’s so easy to think of, it’s like everything I was to ask you to think of an animal you can only say (point at them) ‘cat” This story illustrates that the mind really is capable of assimilating information without them having to judge and analyze - contradict or consider every piece of information they hear - it’s kind of like you're asking the subject to - “just see the wood for the trees”, because the things they think you say are

not the things you mean, so they should ‘hold tight’ and lose the interpretation and instead let the answers emerge. In order to elaborate my point often I have used the following phrasing; “it’s like when you listen to a piece of music, or you get a piece of music in your head, and it keeps playing round and round all day long and you can’t get rid of it”. So in this example I’m stating that just by hearing a tiny piece of music you can elaborate the rest of the tune - and from that have such focus and concentration on that pattern of the song being activated in your brain, that whenever you pay attention to it - that song is still playing in your head - because it’s down to increased bloodflow in that area, those pathways are opened up and they may stay open for a while. To imply that whenever you mention ideas that a similar thing tends to happen - it's that when we learn a ‘new situation’ this process happens where our brain has a sudden release or burst of energy from the forced reinterpretation that we become amused as this puzzle, template, or schema continues in our head without us seeming to be the one who activated it consciously.... it just does because it has the energy to, and amuses itself. You can use these stories in order to illustrate the idea that they need to “pucker up” and “be present” or “be in the room” and “go with the vibe of what you're saying”. Other ideas that you might want to inject could be well suited also, for example it might be cool if you want to actually get the idea that you want the subject to focus on for the rest of the conversation/interaction injected by this point - let me explain what I mean.

See the suggestions that we’ve listed above are mainly to make sure the subject is listening to you, bright eyed and bushy tailed. However, it might not be neccessary therefore to start talking about psychology only to try and make them bright eyed and bushy tailed. Remember - once you do the next step after the idea injection your going to do the ‘lock down’ either by using a super neg or by using the anger suggestion, or by suddenly make their emotions kick - Adeneral glands start releasing hormones into the bloodstream. You need to inject your ideas that are going to be the focus when their adrenaline kicks - the content of their thoughts that they are going to give priority to when their body goes into shutdown to protect only the necessary as it enters something that isn’t exactly like fight or flight mode, but has some of the similarities.

What are the aims of the peace-idea injectsuperneg sequence? Make someone concentrate. Teach someone how their brain can do this. Make someone excitable or scared. How to modify someone else’s brain ‘as if’ they have taken a drug I’m going to be honest - I’ve been working recently using a combination of tablets in order to maintain the perfect writing state - this hasn’t been easy, and took a long time to work out what was legal to take in the United Kingdom, whilst weighing

up what I could actually get hold of, and what wasn’t just a placebo effect. In the end I’ve really found three great tablets, going in this order of importance - Modafinil. Modafinil - makes you alert, its used to make people be wide awake, like truck drivers, or people who are so constantly tired that they are unable to go to work - what I’ve found by taking these is that they aren’t that great for concentration, let me explain what I mean - they don’t neccessarily increase productivity - what they do instead is make you unable to focus on anything other than the thing your doing. For example, I might be walking down a road - purely on Modafinil and know that my Ibiza hotel is just on this street in 400 yards on the left, but what happens is that I’m so focused on the walking - on the mission of getting to the hotel that what I will do is overshoot my walk by quite a long distance, I might be walking for another 20 minutes and I haven;t even considered the fact that I walked passed my hotel twenty minutes ago I am purely focused on getting to that hotel. Me and my friend always tell people that Modafinil doesn’t actually make you concentrate or work -all that it does is - whatever task you are doing - your going to be doing that and you will be unable to think about anything other than the task that you are doing for a long time. So if your scrolling through facebook on Modafinil then your going to be scroling through facebook for a long time and not doing anything else - and if anyone else asked you what you could be doing instead - you wouldn’t be able to give them an answer. Modafinil is not a party drug - whatsoever. Not at all - it doesn’t make you socialize, if you were to go out - or do a gig when you

are on Modafinil - what happens is that you don’t have the fluency to be able to converse with strangers - the conversation is too unpredictable you lose that creativity that free thinking to be able to go anywhere with your imagination and be diverse and interesting - your not interesting when your on Modafinil your highly focused, you don’t gain any euphoria or good feeling hence why it has little abuse potential. So Modafinil sounds pretty good right? Since 2010 I had been looking for tablets that I could take that were legal and could somehow increase me, they could make me a better version of myself. I tried all kinds of vitamins, I did research on Google Scholar, but of course all the stuff developed by the drug companies couldn’t actually be legally obtained, so the only choices you would usually be left down to was to actually work out what the components of the drug were - and see if you could acquire those. Now of course - some drugs actually are manufactured - like there is some kind of chemical process that I wouldn’t understand because I don’t know anything about chemistry to form a new compound through some kind of reaction. I think the layman to all of this would probably assume that most drugs are that - they are formed from some kind of chemical process, they are unique and unobtainable without a understanding of pharmacy and chemistry. That actually isn’t the case - often drugs you read about - the patented super well known powerful drug by some big pharmaceutical company - you read through the ingredients, and you’ll find that they have 20% of their own patented unique thing that only they can manufacture in the drug, and then the other 80% of the drug is some kind of commonly found

solution/plant/mineral. So you might think “oh so only 20% of the tablet actually works - the other 80% is just bulk to make it be full of vitamins of something?” No way, its actually the reverse. When you research the patented component of the drug that the company manufactures, you quickly discover that the patented part is something they’ve placed into lots of the drugs they retail - and many of these drugs are completely unrelated fields of health that bare no similarity in goals with the drug you were analyzing. So then you need to ask yourself - if the drug I’m about to take, has 20% of it identical to a drug that is completely irrelevant for my condition - and would suit a completely different condition better - then that 20% either doesn’t seem to affect me, or affect the completely different person, and therefore would conclude “oh so it must be the 80% of vitamins, solutions, plans, and minerals that seems to be the active force in the drug.” Yeah, bingo! That’s the one. So I was mentioning that at the time I was searching for all kinds of ways that I could improve myself - nothing seemed to work - I seemed to try things that many people on the forums seemed to recommend - and I didn’t seem any more intelligent (nootropics) or any more strong or dominant as a man (these were the two I decided to focus on). I had actually begun to think that just taking vitamins was enough, and that playing around with all these tablets was just a waste of money and actually was stupid - because everytime I got hold of something for about a day I would be saying - “this half seems to be working” and then the next day I would be saying “well, that wasn’t very dramatic... actually thinking about

it, it seems like placebo... I was just feeling the effect on the first day because I was taken in by the process... of trying something new - and searching within my feelings to see if its affecting me, and this searching within myself to see if it was working - was actually awakening within myself the muscle memory - or the impulsive system of what I want - to bring those ideas and reactions to priming so thus I could more easily use them - and thus I would inaccurately believe this was the positive effect from the drug. Well, I wouldn’t believe it, because I would recognize this is how placebo works, but someone else might mistaken it for the actual working of the drug and end up spending a lifetime on some nonsense drug. I was beginning these drugs were all placebo (all the legal ones) until all of a sudden I discovered DHEA, and I was like “Wow, I cannot believe how dramatic that effect is”. DHEA is often referred to as the ‘wonder drug’ or the age reversing drug. Usually such large claims I wouldn't take very seriously. but I thought I would order some. I took far too much the first time I took it, and I suddenly was like “I can’t believe how angry I am” I felt like - you know when you are in that mood where you feel really dominant, and its not that you're necessarily angry but its like on that particular day you feel very strong. When you're in this dominant mood - girls seem to come onto you, and guys seem to automatically want to start fights with you - and your not really noticing that your acting any different but you feel kind of amazing, you feel kind of on top of the world - and are surprised that - “why would people want to fight me today, I’m in such a good mood”. Well this is the effects of high testosterone levels, DHEA is a prohormone, what that means is - that it merely produces more

adrenal hormones, that later convert into stuff like Testosterone or a chance of it converting into Estrogen. Obviously as a guy you don’t want it to convert into Estrogen, but luckily Estrogen converts in the fat cells of men, and if you have high ZInc levels, Zinc actually blocks the pathways (somehow) and therefore prevent these Adrenal hormones turning into Estrogen, thus forcing them to become Testosterone. The reason I ordered DHEA and it was one of the last legal drugs I ordered - for this mission of improving myself - the reason why I accepted that it was potentially a good idea to order DHEA, and that it likely wouldn’t be ‘just another placebo’ was because it was banned as a doping drug within sports. I had hoped that if it was banned within sports - then it was very possibly probable that it actually worked to enhance physical or mental performance. Now although the DHEA made me more dominant which I did feel was good for socializing with people, and did make me seem to get pumped up bigger when I trained at the gym. I do not feel that it increased my intelligence - even though DHEA does convert into Human Growth Hormone which causes the rebuilding of cells and hence why people claim that DHEA can reverse aging. I personally stopped taking DHEA because I felt like my intelligence was reducing - This was a long decision to make. Partially because I had found the new wonder drug which was the Modafinil. Now, I mentioned earlier that Modafinil seemed to make you so focused, but actually reduces creativity.

I hope that illustrates what can happen to your hypnotic subjects if you come across “Dry” or if they come across “Dry” let me explain what I mean by this - sometimes hypnotists or conversationalists can spend so much time trying to make someone focused, trying to make someone committed, trying to make someone agree and sign their name on the dotted line. That actually the interaction becomes very dry... it lacks that wet and moist emotion, it lacks that ability to think freely, to free associate one moment to the next - and talk and think about just anything anything that crops up from the imagination. It limits the conversation to just “one topic” and makes you unresponsive and unreactive to anything off that path. These days when I am talking to someone - I’m assessing “What drug do I believe they are on?” I know full well they haven’t taken anything - but what I mean is “what place are they in” and then what I ask myself if “when do I push them into that state that is similar to X drug”. In this section of “Idea Injection” we are assuming that someone is free thinking, creative, relaxed, peaceful, but their mind is suprised, active and capable of learning. This is very different to the description of Modafinil. It’s almost like we want to “make someone creative so they can understand concept x” and then “make someone have similar effects to what they would have on modafinil” in our structure we do that using the super neg, or kicking the adrenal up or using the anger metaphor. For a while when I was travelling around the world teaching hypnosis courses, I would take Modafinil to hypnotize subjects either side of the course - so I would be awake, and focused.

However what I found is often this would cause me to follow the structure too precisely and loose much of the interaction with the subject - to back and forth flow of responsiveness. Often hypnosis subjects - or people you speak to - copy your behaviour, attitude, to the letter - they become like you while your speaking to them. In order for my subjects to be “wet” rather than “dry” I would have to use the right levels of character, charisma and focus in my conversation and delivery. Anyway, just to finish explaining about what drugs I take in order to write this book. I take Zinc - to block Estrogen, I take Modafinil to make me not tired - focused but also not lazy to make me committed. I take Piracetam which is a drug people use for Lucid Dreaming, and people with alzheimer's are given to increase conductivity between memories and ideas. Piracetam has a strange effect of giving you nightmares. And I take Ginkgo Bilbo to increase blood circulation around the brain, to open up tiny vessels - I believe this works because my cheeks seem to flush when I take it. I’ve taken other tablets that offer to increase blood circulation in the brain, but I’ve found they seem to make your cheeks flush but you don’t feel any more creative. And I take Vitamin B tablets - often used for cell division, for energy between cells when they divide, metabolism of vitamins, chemicals, minerals, etc into cells to help them produce energy and continue whatever task they are doing. I take a vitamin B every time I feel a bit sluggish, so a few times a day.

I refuse to take sugar, and I refuse to take caffeine. This is because I find with Caffeine there is such a large amount of euphoria, that often it makes you delusional about what you can achieve, you tend to often pressume that you can get more done than you actually physically can - it makes you set high goals but then you try to rush to meet them without committing to the process of just doing one task - bit by bit - at a time and seeing what results in the end of it. What I found is that, I have to take the creative drugs in order to counteract the effects of the Modafinil, but I need the modafinil in order to get that drive - that “get up and go” that drive to consistently work. What I’ve found is, the most important thing is just to be consistent - don’t berate yourself, compare your success to others, don’t think about your failures, or congratulate your successes - as this really detracts from the things you're doing that actually are making you move forwards and progress. Success isn’t for everyone, just continue.

What ideas should you inject before you make the subject - focus? So we’ve covered the swings of mood and attention, the polar positions of attention and creativeness and how these are in an annoying swing. Now we just need to understand how we can use it as effectively as possible. So, in the case of pick up - you want a girl to think that you're pretty attractive, pretty interesting, probably pretty smart and switched on - but also the kind of guy who goes out there and

makes what he wants of the world. To achieve this might just mean, acting cool, so stuff like; - Touching the sides of her stomach. - Holding your head up high when you speak. - Being clear and succinct when delivering a point. - Seeming open and honest - Being charming, flirty. - Being interesting and charismatic. There is some scripts and lines that I use to make people feel sexy, or to feel awesome about being with you. One of these is the ‘First Date Metaphor’ where I say something like the following - it’s to invoke, the response of making her really excited to be speaking with you, 

“you know if you’ve ever waited outside the backdoors of a concert before, or a theatre and you know you’re about to meet someone famous, and for whatever reason you suddenly feel as if you’re going to be completely star struck and you won’t be able to calm yourself down”.



“You know when you’re going to go on a date for the first time, and you get really excited…. And it feels like you're just overwhelmed, that you won’t be able to contain yourself, it might even feel as if this person might be able to figure you out too easily or something like you feel naked…



“you feel so whether you should be taken over by the emotion, or if you should just “give it a chance and see how it goes and then you’ll discover the love as you build the relationship… see hypnosis is kind of similar, you can feel yourself responding, and maybe you focus on it more and you respond more until you can’t help yourself you just feel that way”.

So the above suggestion has been used in order to make the girl have that kind of awe factor about you - because you’ve brought up models of what its like to be ‘on top of the world’ like really excited about meeting someone then her mind is going to start preparing for this eventuality. She will start responding to every emergent situation - as if - that occasion has occurred - and as if she is meeting a celebrity - her mind looks for situations and patterns that might resemble this one - the meeting of the celebrity - so when you start acting really attractive - or - really cool, then automatically she is going to be receiving responses that make her half think - “why do I like this guy so much?”, “This guy is awesome” you know she might not fully get their to thinking those thoughts in her head as actual thoughts - but the template is there. The contents of most peoples thoughts doesn’t usually consider other people - we don’t really sit there and think about “That guy is awesome” we more feel something about someone, and we think how we can “how can I make him like me?” but thoughts really are pretty rare, we probably don’t think that many thoughts per day compared to how many other things we do. For example, when I’m writing and I’m in the flow - I really don't think about it, I just write and sometimes i’m watching the

words on the screen - actually often I’m not even watching the screen I’m looking into space not thinking about anything and then I look down at the keyboard and I’m completely amazed that my hands are typing words that I haven’t even thought about - thats kind of the most idealized version of ‘being’. And it’s actually completely possible to have entire days weeks or months like this - where instead of you typing and doing it without thinking and being able to write hundreds of thousands of words a day - you can actually find this special balanced place where you can just do anything all day and it will always be a complete success - if you can actually get this flow going and live on 2-4 hours sleep per night and keep working on producing consistent output, with each second building on the last - i’m convinced you could be mega successful in a handful of days. I had these 11 days in July this year where for whatever reason I discovered this flow - I’ve had this flow in little pieces before, but I seemed to understand fully about it and for 11 days I just outputed as much as I could without thinking too much about the consequences. I ended up completely changing my life and taking my finances from really low to being comfortable - almost overnight, (well over 10 nights). I don’t really know what prompted me at that time to do it. compared to all the other times I wanted to do it - I guess I just got bored of telling people how I was either successful in the past, or how I was going to be successful - I suddenly grew tired of anyone actually knowing anything about me - and then I was just left with me - and what I could do - I discovered that there was no real pleasure to be had in owning things - I discovered all the pleasure in life , the majority of it is about what you can dedicate your time to and to produce creative works.

Anyway, I’ve gone slightly off topic there but it doesn’t matter too much - because it brings me onto a point - you need to be careful to not be too inspirational to the people you want to influence. Let me explain what I mean - “if you make yourself peaceful” and then basically you want to make people fully focus on the things you say then - they might not be able to focus on the things you say. Because they will be too relaxed and calm to hear you - they will consider what you say because they are able to drift in and out between things but then they will drift into considering something else. The mind can only handle a small sum of things at any given time is something that is usually said about working memory the thing is - we aren’t really sure how many schemas can be activated and be primed ready to respond in the back of the mind at any time - but we should assume that its likely not many. One of the metaphors I use to make people really excitable, and at times I used this at parties to make everyone there really enthuastic, and hopefully see if some girls got naked; I would use the following script, and I referred to it as the ‘high on life’ suggestion. I would deliver the metaphor opening with a questioning statement. “you know when you go to a party and you just feel completely on top of the world, high on life, and you just feel so amazing, and because you feel so happy you have this confidence, this silly confidence to do anything that just pops into your mind, you just feel totally free things you’d never usually do, it doesn’t matter if its dancing around like a crazy

person, licking the floor or skinny dipping, you just are out of control because you feel so confident and happy” this is the first part of a two stage set of suggestions I use. Part two goes “it’s like you play until people’s expectations, because you feel far too aware of them, and you find it funny to do so, and you know that feeling where you can’t help yourself but play up to other expectations, like you’re a method actor who gets into the role and can’t stop acting, that’s what it’s like, you understand what I mean, it’s just as if you do the things I want and you don’t know why whenever I speak to you as a hypnotist, and as a man” Why do we use these metaphors? To inject ideas? Why can’t you just use body language, and method acting - like the response you want - in order to make her feel entranced in a situation and end up believing the intended result - do we really need to use these hypnotic looking scripts? We don’t have to use these hypnotic looking scripts, the thing is though - sometimes we do really need to spell it out for people or at least for ourselves to understand exactly what our desired intention with the hypnotic subject we are speaking to is. You might notice that some of the above metaphors - raise the emotion level - and make the person excited and thus likely causes the ‘superneg’ to occur early - so the idea does actually become locked down before we inject it. This might not actually matter - because the way we present these ideas is actually to make them seem exciting and besides as long as the emotion level is raising up at the same time as focus on the idea is occuring - then hopefully they will indeed

become trapped into thinking purely about whatever it is you have brought up. If you think back to the metaphor where I made someone begin thinking about what its like to go on a first date and how you can tend to get nervous, because its not nervous because you're thinking - I really like this guy - its more nervous - because your wondering you know, why you’ve never been able to find the right guy? Is this relationship the one? Why is it that I really want to have a relationship? Is he a good guy? By making the subject think these things as I tell the story actually elicits all the reasons why they actually want a relationship - even though I am just talking about a story doesn’t really matter too much - because temporarily they want to be looked after, they want someone they can be with. It might not be - you - they want. It’s just that they want someone and you're there. But that’s all you need. One thing that you see - new conversational pick up artists do is they learn a metaphor - and they think just by saying one paragraph of text is going to cause the response you want. But the thing is - if you say a metaphor or script and/or its out of context with everything else your saying - then its not going to have the desired effect - its just going to be overlooked. If your in a desert, you can imagine that your in the artic as much as you want - but everything around you is screaming at you ‘desert’. You pay attention to usually the schema that has the most ‘bumps’ the one that seems to be most relevant for the situation your in, the one that keeps receiving ongoing attention or activity within your enviroment, the one that is suprising or changing.

The first date routine - was designed to cause that nervousness that we feel when we are about to meet a celebrity - but also that feeling of ‘what would it be like to get ready to jump out of a plane’ by making someone feel out of control in that manner because their adrenaline is kicking, and they are focusing on the pattern your eliciting and finding themselves dwelling on it. We are using this kind of metaphor to make the person a little bit scared - (this is very similar to the superneg technique that we are explaining next), but a little bit excited, to cause them to have black and white thinking, to focus on what is being said and only them, to force them to engage and listen to you rather than be bored and unattached. If you want to make the subject fancy you - you need to recognize that just because someone ‘fancies you’ doesn’t mean they are going to ever do anything about it - someone could fancy something for years - but unless the right scenario comes up, the right conversation, the right context - they might never kiss or get together. If you look at my suggestions that I often use to make people act, pretend or play up to, to game with - or play alone - with expectations. Then this kind of makes someone more creative and gives them an opportunity to act like someone who would rather than acting like someone that is usually like themselves who doesn’t take action. We want to encourage that playful state, where you “act and you do things - just because - and you don’t care”, “whatever you think is funny you do”, “if you have a good idea, you have to do it immediately, your excitable like a child playing a childhood game”.

In order to make a girl act upon fancying you, sometimes I say something like the following after delivering suggestions that would result in her wanting a boyfriend or after I have spent time - making sure I looked good - making sure I spoke sexy, making sure I looked at her lips, and moved in close to her everytime to speak. Then I know the idea of ‘kissing me’ is at least running in the primed part of her brain, but she would never act on it unless the whole situation was emergent and landed with a kiss. So what we need to do is do something that makes the situation flow and makes her act in a way she wouldn’t normally. So we focus on making her hyper responsive to us, by delivering suggestions of what its like to be a girl and to play up the to expectations of guys. The script follows; “ you know as a girl,.. we;’ve all done it, where we go to a party and we can’t help but be in a silly mood, and we play up to people’s expectations, you know how an method actor will just play up to their audience, and they won’t be able to stop because they get into that role, now… this is what will happen when I speak to you from the position of a hypnotist or from the position as a man”. I’m expecting her to elaborate the confidence she has and to use that confidence to play up for me, in the way I want “it’s just as if you do the things I want and you don’t know why” I’ve almost directly hypnotized her to do whatever I want – and put a context around it as to why she’ll feel amazing about it. Other good suggestions to use on subjects when you meet them “you only live once” often you want a subject to be at peace and calm with themselves and get things out of the past, or concerns

in the future out of their head as they distract the subject from concentrating on the present. So I usually will just say “you know when you just feel like, at peace, like you take a breath right now, and you feel calm… as if its just you and the universe, like it’s a long conversation with the peace of your surroundings, and nothing matters anymore… you can do what you want”.

Have them experience emotions quickly Prior to the development of the superneg - The superneg, is a great technique to do hypnosis covertly that causes people to concentrate on the ideas you have just opened in the subjects mind - and be unable to switch belief system - it leaves them stuck with the ideas that you have aroused and elicited and they are unable to be able to come off that task - they are kind of stuck with it. Sometimes what you want to do is to make someone experience the broadest range of emotions, as intensely and quickly as possible - you want to have these emotions - ready to be called at a moments notice. You know how - if you cried, you might be more prompted to cry at a situation a few days later because you cried ‘just the other day’ whereas at other times you can go months without ever crying at all? Well, its like that - in order to find a new joke funny you need to have already laughed at another one. Because we are going to be expecting very demanding things of the people we are speaking to - we are going to want them to be experiencing a huge range of things - very quickly - and we want really dramatic responses - we want them to feel out of control -

and we want to be able to play with their mood swings at a moments notice. Then what we need to do is already have the subject - know what crying is - know what laughter is - know what sadness is know what europhia is - know what happiness is - know what loving someone means. So then when we mention “Doesn’t it feel good to have someone who you truely love?” We instantly know that the subject doesn’t have to recall what we are talking about - instead that schema is already rehearsed and is suddenly brought into full focus the moment we mention it - and then we can get a full dramatic response out of the person we are speaking with. Making someone tearful is one that I avoided for many years. However now I really see the significance of it and I kind of refuse to ignore it. I would say something like the following “you know when someone says’ ‘ are you ok’ and you think ‘’yeah i’m fine’ and they say ‘are you sure your fine?’ and then you suddenly feel really sad when they say ‘ sure?’” I have a script like that - but its got to be delivered perfectly - but I can usually get a fear tears out of most people when I say it. When I see those tears I know I’m onto absolute gold - because the person i’m speaking to is really going to want to be cared for and looked after the moment they feel really sad. 

“Hypnosis is like, you know when someone keeps questioning why your sad, then you feel sad, and they ask if you’re going to try and you begin crying?”,

So now I can use that emotional hook as part of my stories and conversation - just by implying it even slightly in a story later on - by having all these emotional nuggets set up - allows you to

string through and speak about more complicated stories, more quickly while still getting the full intense responses out of the subject you are speaking to. You can also prime things like the angry feeling - or the happy feeling, so you might say “you know when your angry and you can't calm yourself down" in order to get someones anger ready to use at a moments notice. 

and in order to make someone happy at a moments notice you might briefly mention "you know when you feel amazing and on top of life and you don't know why" and keep talking about the metaphor until you see the response out of the person you're speaking to - so that the emotion hook is setup for later on so you can come back to it - just by implying something similar related to it.



Another example of this might be to say "Hypnosis might be scary, but don’t be scared" – suggestion for being scared,



Here’s an example of how you can use hypnosis to make someone think about laughing, “Like when it’s an awkward situation – because you’re not supposed to laugh at something because it’s inappropriate and then your friend says “don’t laugh” and you burst out laughing”.



And an example of how you can make someone feel really happy, “Hey, you know when you’re really happy, and you can feel a smile crawling across your face, underneath your cheeks, and it feels like you’re going to burst out laughing”,

What is the superneg? The superneg is a way of making someone stuck on the idea that you have injected. Basically what you are trying to is make someone really relaxed at the beginning before you ever introduce the idea that you want them to be stuck on. And then you introduce the idea - so now that they are really creative and they are able to asslimate information easily without judging it and it going through some kind of filter that is set up in the mind of the person your speaking to - these kind of filters are turned off. The person is just dead relaxed and there really isn’t anything in the way of them thinking of the concept that you have presented - the problem is that because the person is chilled out then one idea can just flow into another - like a dream can just flow from one moment to another without you even been able to really remember anything distinguisable about the differences between the two moments in the dream because nothing really definable happened. Your like almost too creative, like sure you’ve managed to take on board information but the thing is - because your that creative that all ideas kind of merge together as one - then there is nothing that really seperates the information from each other there is no focus, and there is no black or white thinking. So the superneg is essentially a way of suddenly getting someones ‘wiredness’ to switch onboard so suddenly they are dead switched on and concentrating so now they are almost unable to think of anything else other than the basic information they have going through their head at the time. hat it is like is

that whatever scematic pathways are open before the superneg are the one’s that stay open. → so how do we achieve this, well we have mentioned before that a way of making someone achieve this is by suddenly dramatically raising their emotion levels. However what we have discovered is that by suddenly raising their adrernal levels causes this same effect. Therefore we have developed a series of methods to suddenly increase the aderenal levels of the person we are speaking to so they are kind of stuck onto the idea that was presented - and they seem to give far too much priority and considration to that mental software. Why do we call it ‘The Superneg’ Well if you notice that in pick up artist theory there is something called ‘The Neg’ the neg is basically something you say to a girl that is a bit of a backhand compliment, its something that you say to her that is half to chat her up, and it half sounds like you're taking the piss out of her - it’s not clear as to whether you're being nice to her or you're picking out some kind of flaw about her. These negs are short comments that are there to make the girl you're saying it to laugh or smile - but be somewhat surprised, maybe the slight bit of concern or tiny bit of anger in the girl for a brief moment - is a way that raises her adrenal levels. There are a couple of examples of the negs - “you can doll her all up, and you still can’t take her anywhere!” which I believe is one of Mystery's lines. And the following line comes from PUALingo “You have really big ears, don’t worry, I think it’s cute, kind of like a bunny. “

Let’s take that final line as the perfect example what has happened there - is that the girl has heard as much as the ‘big ears’ and at that moment they will start reacting, they are a mixture of surprised, entertained, assumed, insulted, upset, angry - their emotional levels have suddenly shot up.

The Superneg’ and testosterone levels in girls. So what we have discovered by looking at the research on testosterone in women is that it is associated with their drive for satisfaction by reconnecting with their bodily selves. It is not associated with girls been more prompted to have sex with guys. Did you know that when you put two rats or pretty much any kind of mammal in a cage - with one being female and the other being male they tend to have sex maybe 3-4 times a day. what happens is when the female rate is going through ovulation (including a few days before and a few days after) they tend to have far more sex with the male rat. Although it’s not the female rat that initiates the sex. Anyway, what happens when you put lots of rats in the cage, lots of males and lots of females - that instead of them having sex every single day. The amount of sex daily actually drops - the rats tend not to have any sex whatsoever - none of them - on a daily basis instead of the amount of sex going from 3-4 times a day per couple of rats it actually drops to almost non-existent. What happens is that they move all the sex to just happening in the times where the female rats are on heat - the male rats almost just don’t seem to care for sex except for when the female rats are on heat. What happens when the rats ovulate is that they all ovulate at exactly the same time - the ovulation cycles of the

female rats match up so they can all ovulate - and in this case have sex during the same short time-frame. And during this period where the rats are ovulating what happens is that - all of the rats instead of having sex just with each other as couples - they have a kind of mass orgy with all the rats having sex with as many of the other rats - (kind of ) as possible. The signalling to the male rats that the female rats are during the ovluation (or about to go onto it) is indicated through their behaviour,which is triggered by their extrodinarly high adernal levels and testostrone levels. According to many studies - women are 120% more likely to masubate during the Ovulation part of their cycle - and the high testosterone levels bring on sensations of being warmer than usual, sensations of being a little more pissed off than usual, and that you need something to kind of ground you? I don’t know if you’ve ever had a night where you are just kind of pissed off - maybe whats happened is you just feel really confident and dominant, but for some random reason it’s like every single guy in the club is trying to have a fight with you. But bizarrely on this same evening - every girl seems to think you are a bloody rockstar, they are like massively keen on you like you're some kind of greek god. Women aren’t actually more likely to have sex during the time they are on their period - they are actually less likely to have sex with a stranger during their high testostrone levels. They actually tend to go out less, and spend more time alone - it only

makes them more horny and annoyed it doesn’t actually make them want to go out and meet people to have sex with. But what it does do, is when a women is with a sexual partner she will have 3 times as much sex with him than usual - a rise of 300% is really huge! and what will also happen is, girls will try to relieve themselves of the huge amount of stress build up associated with the high adeneral and testostrone levels. So we figured that we would create a sequence that would cause this kind of feeling in the people we are speaking with - it’s definitely true that showing social dominance will indeed make you appear strong and will sometimes make girls adrenal levels go up. I don’t know if you’ve ever met - ‘that kind of woman’ man I hate these types but there are some girls who what they seem to try and get into arguments with guys because it seems to somehow almost ‘turn them on’ it’s like they are trying to have an argument with you just so they can either get so pissed off at you that they can call the police, or so they can suddenly have sex with you and have all the sexual tension relieved. Girls who have been raped during the time of the month when they are on heat - actually get raped 30% less. It’s not clear why this is, it might be that the reason is simply because - they tend to leave the house less because they want to spend more time with themselves - It might be however that these girls are more violent during the time when their testosterone levels are high and thus likely to scare off attackers, or be able to have the physical strength to be about to outrun aggressors. However I almost darent write the other option that it could be but it might be that women on that time of the month ten to

report rape less. -perhaps because they felt guilty about enoying it. Anyway that is a stupid thing to say however there is various bits of research to say that often the majority of the reason why a rape isn’t reported is because of the feeling of being ashamed, or the confusion of enjoying it, and being ensure as to whether that therefore qualifies as rape - however as the author of this book I need to mention at this point that I don’t think that just because you enjoy something it means it isn’t rape - It's still rape. Because, if you are forced into a situation it is often a very scary experience, you might worry about your life being taken - and no one should have to face that kind of fear, so yes it is certainly rape. There was another thing that needed mentioning - there is a common misconception that higher testosterone levels actually makes people more violent. Actually this isn’t true - higher testosterone levels actually makes people more reserved, they actually are far more emotional and sensitive. You hear men complaining about illneses, and broken bones ‘mens flu’ they complain about the common cold as if its the most painful thing ever. While women seem to think the man is overeacting - then when the woman’s hormone levels are all over the place and she is complaining about her period the guy seems to be unable to understand. Well high testosterone levels actually make you want to comfort yourself, so when you have a broken bone or a common cold you tend to want to ‘treat yourself’. Therefore you tend to see guys who when they are really stressed what the need to do is have some alone time. If you notice with men they will tend to walk away from a situation that provokes their sense of anger, - if a women is

arguing with a man he will usually tend to back down and go and say “ I need a walk” or he will say “I will see you in a few days” or he will say “I’m going out” guys find that they need to walk away from these situations so that they can be by themselves so that they can reconnect with their sense of self.

How to use the Superneg What we found - is that - if we could raise the adrenal levels of a girl immediately after - suggesting or implying that she fancies us ‘the idea injection’ or that we are sexy, or that she is coming back to our house, or that the guy owes us money - or some other kind of idea injection. Then what happens is not only do you make the person you're speaking to unable to think of anything else - unable to concentrate on any other idea other than the limited number of ideas present in their head that you have already elicited. But you will also find that often the girl you are speaking to suddenly experiences this huge sense of being more horny. But realize that when someone wants to be alone, and you pester them - they might just get annoyed and go home , so you can easily winde people up - so you need to really stay on it. What techniques can raise these adrenal levels? Well take it this way - if you saw a gun, or at least thought you saw a gun, and then it turns out that you didn’t - for a moment you would have that sudden level of shock where you are unable to think anything other than what you are already thinking of. The other day I was with a friend, and he was in an argument with someone - anyway the argument was unimportant and he

really didn’t care about it - but he was still really angry, anyway I was trying to talk to him about internet marketing - a topic which he is very knowledgeable on and he absolutely loves to pieces. I told him that there is lead capture forms now within Google Adwords, and honestly no matter how many times I tried to explain what I meant - he simply didn’t understand what I was talking about, so I changed onto another interesting internet marketing technique that I was now focused on , and once again despite his best intentions trying to understand what I was talking about - he was too angry to be able to think about what I was saying. His mind was locked down and focused onto - the argument he had - but because that argument was over - he was left with the high adeneral levels - but without the actual content of the argument still disturbing him. There would be all the background mental software running but he is focused and dedicated onto that in his head - that he simply doesn’t have the mental capacity to be able to focus also on the things I am saying in addition to that. It’s like trying to do long division while driving 100 mph down the motorway with the car radio turned up to maximum volume. So let’s actually cover what these techniques are that ‘prioritize’ the to only ‘running mental software’ of the person you are speaking to; Ok, more than it being an actual technique, its often just something simple like briefly more a moment you might raise

your voice, or for a second you might change the pitch of your voice so suddenly you seem more dominant. Or it might be that suddenly when you speak to someone that suddenly you seem to square up to someone, or when you make a hand gesture you seem to raise your arm a bit too high, and gesture slightly too close to them. These activities suddenly make the person you are speaking to feel like something - scary - or shocking - or aggressive is happening. You know like when suddenly someone uses your full name - it sounds like your about to be told name - or when you suddenly have your name said in a firm voice - it suddenly makes you really scared that you're going to be told off or something. By doing this kind of technique you’ll find that it really does cause a level of focus that makes it difficult for the person your influence to be able to detract and move back to ‘being creative’. What you often see in hypnosis is that people are so relaxed that they almost relax themselves out of the hypnosis. Like for example you might say to someone “oh you’ve forgot your name,” and for a moment the person is there thinking - I’ve forgot my name - and they think “that’s kind of cool, but of i’m so relaxed if I just think about how to recall my name I can just know my name “ so in this case it wasn’t that they didn’t forget their name. What it actually was is that they did forget their name - because they were so relaxed and creative that they understand how to forget their own name - and suddenly they find a way that they can remember their own name also because they are so creative, and so relaxed.

The superneg is the bit where suddenly they are stuck. The way to think of it is this - sometimes you're really creative and free thinking - able to think out of the box, whereas other times you're really focused and wired and you're just able to continue with just one task and you can’t seem to switch off it, you're stuck on it. In order to do a superneg you must already have the schema-set activated - in order to have done that in the first place you need to have done the peace element, then the creative element, then the learning set - then the focus and the superneg - it might sound like a few elements but really its a very quick sequence of events that quickly brings up an idea in someone's head and locks them down to only being able to think from that psychological ‘frame’. Well in order to make someone like that you need to raise their emotional levels dramatically and kind of ‘wake them up’ you need to suddenly shock them, so they are like “fuck”. This might mean scaring the person you're speaking to, just to show a brief silly example - it might be that the person you're speaking to briefly for a split second thinks they saw a gun, or they saw a giant spider, but then it turns out there isn’t one. It’s that sudden moment of surprise where they lose themselves and can’t think straight anymore. or that moment a friend is angry and you try to ask them about something but they can’t seem to listen or understand anything you are talking about because they are so far into the frame they are in and can’t come off it. The superneg just works - I began demonstrating it to a friend.

“man, FUCK!”... “You know when stuff just works, and its like you hit the switch, like when you go to play the lottery, and you just know you're going to win, because you think to yourself "i feel like i deserve this" Well... what if, you actually did.” So in this example, I scare the guy by saying “Man, Fuck” it’s unclear if i’m saying “fuck you” so immediately I know the guy is going to be listening. I want him to quickly engage with the idea that sometimes stuff just works, because I’m demonstrating the technique of making him believe something.... So, I want him unconsciously to have this sequence I’m doing ‘just work’ and then I pace that response onto “sometimes you feel like you're just going to win” because “you deserve it” so suddenly I’m talking to his ego and making it feel big. And then I say “what if you actually did” so I’m making him believe he’s kind of won the lottery in order to get deals out of him immediately in the present, deals that would be worth a significant amount of capital for myself. I then explained to him what I did, I said; “So in this example, so now being the idea is the peace to free think, in the future pace, allowed the switch, which was the locked down, with the rush of adrenaline in the superneg, ... bitch” So the reason why I put the ‘bitch’ on the end was in order to make his adrenaline literally ‘lock down’ right now and take the data in that I just said - so that I was kind of hypnotizing him, to understand the affect of the future-bait and switch technique, so that he would both think i was clever, and be able to use the technique for himself.

Nail the approach - The approach - Look for someone who is fascinated - They believe you’re trying it on. - When approaching a group say “hey, (pace their evening) it’s a nice night tonight”…. Ask how they are? Ask why they are here “what brings you here?” wait for them to ask you questions, and announce that you’re a hypnotist. - You don’t need to announce you’re a hypnotist; your other option is just to answer your life questions honestly and then offer to show them something about their mind. - When talking to a group, talk to the player who smiled/made eye contact with you to begin with, because they let you in, then immediately talk to the leader of the group almost to thank them, then speak to the eye contact player, then address the weakest member of a group just ask her name, and then say “Hi” to the mid-level players and don’t address the middle players any longer. - Never argue with the group.

The Future Pace, Bait & switch technique I want to talk about one of the routines that has dramatically changed my life. It is my number 1 persuasion tip. Until I started using this tip, and the one I describe about finding the group dynamics and entering the group from the position of the group member that is required to complete. Until I started using ‘follow the trend’,

‘spot the demand and weakness of the group’, ‘reassure the decisions and ego of the person I’m speaking to, and be the man who is everything they wish they had themselves’. Until I had these tips, I was a bit weak. I had a life where I was giving too much to others and I constantly felt like they would 'take, take, take!' until I had nothing left. I couldn't work out how you could be a nice guy while at the same time maintaining some benefit for yourself. If you look through some of the content we have focused on recently, we've dedicated alot of information towards success. And how success is about being consistent in your output, day to day delivering, producing. Doing just that little bit of what you can do that will actually lead to you having something to show for your efforts. The problem is unfortunately, life is often about 'its either you or them'. Like, put it this way. If I was to thank everyone who has helped me in my life by buying them a drink, well... it would bankrupt me. I used to wonder, why if I'm teaching so many people hypnosis, if I'm spending so much of my personal time with people who have become great hypnotists and they are hearing about good opportunities, why aren't at least 1% of these opportunities they get why don't they pass me back that 1%. The truth is people do get really greedy, well, its not really greed it's just that your goals and focus change, and you always want to achieve more. Take me for instance, even if I had a million pounds, it would never be enough to achieve my goals. I would like to have

television production quality, my own TV series. Even if I had 20 million, I want to actually make a feature film about hypnosis. If I had 40k Cash, I want to spend that 40k making the best book ever published on hypnosis and sell it in every book store in the world and appear in television chat shows every morning talking about the publication of my book. The most important thing to do is be consistent in your output and approach to things, if you remember the book I wrote called 'Getting Money out of guys' I describe an approach for how to day to day spot groups who you can influence, and speak in a certain way in order to gain out of them. Using that technique, I would be able to speak to a group of people and even with just the most basic - really bad - card trick, I could create an emotional response out of them that would make them 'ridiculously happy' and so pleased to have me in their group. I also explain that by being with people, they want to own you, they think that because you are spending time with them that this is no cost to yourself, - which of course it is, you are their purely to make income and get out. So what you need to do is - build the interaction around the delivery of the thing they need - the thing that they are in short supply of, and just by having it would enrich their lives dramatically. Everyone has a unique area of speciality, but by doing this has tradeoffs, they had to give up things in order to get what they've got. The thing is, if you're in the group - without that attitude - you'll quickly become worthless. Because what will happen is that they group will feel like them being 'that entertained' is just a nightly thing that is now going to be their lives. that suddenly they've got that problem in their life dealt with and now permanently it

will always be out the way so now they can focus on the other things they want to achieve in their lives. Sometimes a group lacks a leader, - in a group of some groups of guys - (or in the case of getting girls - a group of girls) they clearly lack a leader. They all are the same ranks. So what you need to do is come in and build some kind of personality and specialism into the group, lead the group organise them into roles and personality traits, this will create each of them avatars through better which each of them can express themselves - of course building people avatars always limits people into being 'just that' but it doesn't really matter because at least for a while it will fill them full of confidence. Having a clear character that you can 'act from' gives you a kind of authors voice and it will fill you full of confidence when you speak to people. I would make the same advice for you to have a set character problem is that that character won't work in every group you enter - you need to be the one who changes - think of yourself as some kind of charismatic host for the evening - some kind of entertainer. But realize that your goal shouldn't be to entertain, your goal should be to 'act' you need to act as best you can to fit into the role required. If the group you are entering needs a 'yes man' someone who always just agrees 'yes' every time a question is asked in some kind of supportive role, then you should do that. If the group needs someone who is quiet and tame, you need to represent that role. If the group needs someone who is there to be 'the good looking one' then you need to recognize and take hold of that.

The same goes for the book 'Convert' in which I outline an approach that it took me months to actually roll-out but the implemention was a simple psychological model that allowed me to slowly win a girl back through persuasion and influence techniques. I used to think that persuasion was a little bit of a dirty word. I thought I was being a nice guy. But really, I was just being a muppet. Life only gives you the smallest amount of opportunity and you’ve really got to make the most of that tiny inch that you’ve got. The Future Pace, and switch or as I sometimes call it The pacebait- and switch. It basically just means that you look for the gap in someones life and you build a dream which you achieve for them in the mentally imagined future, in order to hijack their present. I have found this is the number one way to persuade others. People are motivated by opportunity and will almost do anything to get hold of it. Take me more instance, I'm hugely motivated by the want to film hypnosis in the way I dreamt of years ago, so if someone even slightly implies there is an opportunity to go to awesome events and do that, perhaps they mention about an opportunity in Vegas to do filming, I will jump through hoops to pull off the event and make it happen, even if it actually works out to be a detriment to myself. This tactic takes advantage of the human brain’s inability to differentiate between what it imagines doing, and what it believes its already achieved. the moment you achieve a goal, you lose motivation to do it again, because of the more units increased of a product the more the value of the product increases with each subsequent unit. Therefore the value of the

imagined activity, in this case destroys the motivation to actually go out and achieve that future goal. See people think when you affirm something in your mind when you say something like "I'm going to be a millionaire' that it actually helps you become one, that by perhaps "imagining the car you would drive, the life you would lead - helps them establish the mindset... but it doesn't because you actually already feel like you are a millionaire. In order to build a wall, you can't think about having the wall completed, you need to just lay the brick right in front of you - as perfectly as you can lay one brick. - It's consistency to output single tasks that build upon yesterday, and build a brighter future tomorrow, everyday that produce success. And that's the thing, if you're always distracting yourself about the other things then you can't commit to the process of laying one brick at a time in order to be able to actually live each day as it comes and to get all the bricks done to eventually have that wall. The mind does what it finds familiar, and actually by knowing what you want to achieve, rather than just actually 'enjoying placing down a brick perfectly' really takes all your motivation away. Knowing these secrets allows you to manipulate others. I hate to sound like a bit of a conspiracy nut, but you are programmed by the entire world, and you are largely programmed to be not successful. You think you have to buy Christmas presents for all your family, you have to do this, you have to do that.

Just think about it this way, - everytime you go for a drink with your friend just because he has 'broke up with his girlfriend' or every time you "hang out" with your boss, secretly because you think its going to one day result in a raise - but you've forgot about that being the reason, then what he has done to you is the future pace - bait and switch. Being successful isn't about committing to a daily increase but instead to a daily decrease. What do i mean by this, i mean that you need to hack away at the unnecessary, the unessential and commit yourself only to the key most important tasks that are going to make the biggest effect on your success. The moment you throw someones 'progress - day to day' focus out of the window and put a big shiny dream infront of their eyes then suddenly they find they are unable to go back to reality and do the day to day, and find they are more reliant on the goals you put infront of them to succeed. This is the code, to free yourself from the 'matrix' per say. Because you're giving up all the ways in which people have hook winked you, and instead you take back and profit out of them. It's bad sure. But you need to do it a little bit so you've got some profit in the bag, and besides, what you can find is... by simplifying the process of your life and becoming more efficient, eventually you'll produce such efficiencies that you'll be able to have profit from the efficiency that you're doing that everyone else in their lives seems incapable of achieving. By you being successful, you can better allocate resources to those that you want to help. For example, if know that I can use the future pace bait and switch to make someone more committed to a task that I believe will work out in the subjects favour in the future then I will do that, and I have done that.

So, I don't know whether we've gone through all the details of how exactly it works and how you can perform it. When you do it, its weird, you actually get this weird feeling... like your actually modifying the roots of existence. I know that's a bit of a crazy thing to say. It's like you're speaking to God, and he's saying to you... "You have choices, this is the choice path that you're going to open up, and I can't stop what's going to happen when its open, but it means you will have all these opportunities - many of them will be great but they will be your focus for some time". It's like you can guide someone else through that process where a new pathways of opportunities open up. In NLP this could be thought as a parts reframe, but the parts reframe structure isn't quite the same. When you do a parts reframe, what you do is you... discover that behind every behaviour someone carries out, everything someone is doing in their life, they secretly have a motivational an intention - in the unconscious in the background running that is fueling their behaviours, decisions, actions, habits..... What you do is essentially remind someone of the positive intention, the motivation behind what they are doing. And then you in that moment make someone feel euphoric about a new pathway of motivation, a new set of positive intentions, and actions they could take for that. The moment they do that, they tend to leave all the old actions and behaviours behind and experience a huge sense of freedom, and inner peace and forgiveness. sometimes resulting in them crying. Well I've found there's ways to produce these huge bursts, either towards inner zen, or away from zen.

The idea is, I become a Zen centre for peace, free from materialism, free from worries of the future, and failures from the past, free from judgements of things I don't care more, and only invested in what I am doing... the laying of each individual brick. If you know of the hip hop preacher, he tells a story about a boy who comes up to him and says "I want to be a millionaire" in the story the guru says to the boy "look if you want to be a millionaire, meet me at 4am in the morning on the beach" The boy questions the intentions of the guru and says... "but 4am? I have work the next day.. on the beach? Why?" The guru says to the young boy " look, if you want to be a millionaire you need to meet me on the beach at 3.30am" the boy says "OK" they meet on the beach at 4am because the preacher turns up late, and the boy asks "So what are we doing here" the guru says "come out into the ocean" they walk out into the ocean, its cold, and the guru then pushes the boys head under the water, until he's fighting to come up to breath, The guru says "do you want to breath" he brings the boys head up, he says "yes" then the guru dunks his head back under the water again, then the guru brings his head up and says "do you want to breath" and then dunks his head back under the water again. Eventually the guru explains "when you want to be a millionaire, as badly as you want to breath, you will be a millionaire". That's the thing, you need to live and breath the values you hold. It's the logic and consistency of your internal philosophy that defines all of your actions, even leading someone slightly astray from their morals, ethics and values, their ideas.... actually destroys the entire system as a whole.

The truth is, you won't meet anyone who has a system as a whole, and most people you meet actually believe all kinds of crazy things - they might not recognize any of the things they say, as their beliefs, because if you question their words their words will quickly switch and change and it would look like the person is trying to back track and actually knows what they are talking about. But don't be mistaken, people you meet don't actually have beliefs, morals and values in a coherent system. They actually believe that when the cat is stolen in their favourite tv series, like desperate housewives, they actually feel sorry for the actress who has lost the cat, and they actually start to relate to what they themselves would do if they lost a cat. and then get these action-schemata ready for the future chance of losing a cat eventhough they may not have one. By watching it makes them want a cat, and they begin doing the mental accounting to eventually get a cat, they might design a setup in their lives similar, and social networks and support to somehow prevent the loss of the cat, or the recovery of it once they do lose it. People really think like this, these little response sets just build up in peoples heads. I know we are just reiterating the earlier point we made, but. when you make someone mentally invest into a potential future, you actually make it impossible for them to achieve it. - it makes them entirely reliant on you for it. I accidently did this strategy on myself by wanting to be successful, and it destroyed me. I thought I was doing the 'right thing' that by wanting to be successful I was somehow a 'good person'. But when you give up being successful, and you give up being a good person - and

instead do - just the process that causes efficiency - then you are by definition the successful allocation of resources, and thus are both those things. Here's where I went wrong: When I was age 19 years old I pretty much decided that I was going to be a millionaire and I started taking steps, - taking the steps is the right thing to do, but the next bit is where I messed up entirely. I decided that I would ask everybody what they think I should do to become rich and famous - what they advise I should do - I incorrectly assumed that other people around me, some of which had had success actually knew how they achieved it. (they often don't - they just talk from their ego about how they were so clever. When really it's not like that). Then what I did was plan out, what I would achieve, I would say “cool, so I have to do this and this and then I will have this many thousand per week, and this many hundred thousand per year and if I invest it, on these stocks, now next month I should be making x number of million” I was completely living in a dreamworld future. It’s not that the calculations I was making were incorrect. They would work! It’s just the fact that by spending all that time calculating how much my time is worth in my head suddenly makes my time worth something like 5 thousand a day, or 20,000 a day! Then what happens is, anything less than this 500 pounds a day? or 1000 pounds a day, I would actually turn down, or I would refuse to work for, because I was unmotivated to achieve it. and

Unfortunately dedicated a bit of my time to being upset I wasn't achieving what I thought I was worth. When the truth is, I could have just started. Well, you can do this thing to people! It’s an awful thing to do (see I’m going back on saying that persuasion is dirty) but... unfortunately life is pretty tough and you have to do this pacebait switch thing to get ahead. You could see the future-pace, bait and switch like this - "you make someone feel secure about their future, so you make them lazy in the present." so in Zen terminology you destroy their present, For example, suppose you want someone to give you a 1,000 pounds. you normally wouldn't think it was possible that you could walk up to a stranger and them give you such a large sum of money?.... but that's making an assumption about how much that amount of money is worth to them, and likely making an assumption about how much money you believe they own. And also means you've made assumptions about what you believe are the most important things that the person you're approaching focuses on in their life. I used to be a bit of a spend-a-holic. If someone asked me for two hundred pounds, cool its no problem. I didn't even mind about having it back. (I know bizarre) but my goal wasn't to get rich, I didn't care about money... I wanted to do street hypnosis. That's all I wanted to do and nothing else... so nothing else mattered anymore. You can do this same strategy to people, to find out the things they have but don't value, so you can have them.

Let's take the example of a simple strategy that I used to play in Monopoly board games. I used to play a lot of monopoly in University, (I thought I was clever... but we played everyday as groups. it was a bit obsessive) Anyway, the strategy goes like this, you have a player who might have two of the orange cards and one red card, and you have someone who has two of the red cards and one orange card. Well this was one of my core strategies for winning monopoly - that and being efficient in my play with relation to how quickly the competitors were becoming too powerful (oh if I only did that in my street hypnosis business life sooner). So the strategy goes like this, maybe I'm the third player and I have cards like this... I have one purple card, one blue card, and one green card. (So two of those are high value cards - but none of them are enough to complete the set). So what you need to realize is that neither player one is willing to give up their red card to player 2 and player 2 isn't willing to give up their orange card to player 1. Both of them want to complete the sets they nearly have. And therefore player 1 won't be willing to sell one of his Oranges - because he thinks he is on the verge of hitting a set, and player 2 won't be willing to sell one of her reds because she thinks she is on the verge of a set. Now you've got to make this transaction good, because this might be your only opportunity to win the game by using anything other than the chance role of the dice and making efficient decisions. Then all you need to do is have them imagine being a millionaire in the future, and the reason they believe they are a millionaire in the future is because of an idea you helped them develop. Like for example “man, you're so clever, you can make it work,

you just need to do ‘X’... I have some ideas on how you can do it” now you’ve made them see themselves as a millionaire. The more money you make from this transaction the more likely you are to overcome the randomness of chance of you winning, and actually stand a real opportunity. You also need to take account - that because you're about to sell the red property to the red guy and have him complete a set, you are making the assumption he is going to pay an unrationally large price for it. I.e. because in a moment you know the moment he is going to place hotels on all of his properties - well both of them are when you sell both of them their respected 'needed card' then what you need to be aiming to do, is bankrupt their opportunity to build hotels on their properties for several turns by overcharging them - inflated prices for their needed property. So in this example, I had a green card, a blue card, and a purple card. The ideal deal would be to swap a blue card for his red spare, if he doesn't agree to this I might offer the more valuable green card. I would avoid offering the purple card - not because its high value but instead because you only need two properties in the purple breed in order to be able to have a brand and build hotels on each - if this happened the game would be likely won by the player who achieved that - whereas with the green card or the blue card you know the odds of them ending up with 'all three' of the necessary cards to 'own the brand' is unlikely. You know that by offering to swap cards with the player they have nothing to necessarily lose - as the other player who wants that card will never give up their two other cards - and therefore the red card is worthless to player 1 -

You need to offer the swap of the blue card for the red card without arousing player 1 to think that what you're doing is trying to acquire the cards so that you can sell them to the person who dramatically needs them. Anyway, I think that fully explains the strategy - you basically try and become rich - not to make you rich - because that's not so important at this stage - you can't buy hotels anyway because you don't have a full set, right? so your money is just sitting in the bank doing nothing - and the money doing nothing is pointless because soon the inflation in the game will make that money worthless - so its not the money you need - it's bankrupting the potential opportunities the player you're dealing with will have in the future, in order to give you a fighting chance that you will land on enough cards (randomly) to produce a set and then instantly have the money to produce hotels while the other players are fighting over small change trying to find the money to finally develop their three card sets. In a roundabout way, we pull a similar strategy off in the futurepace, bait-switch. So, what you need to do is make the person you're speaking to either not value money by making them focus on something else more important in their life - take the example of a stripper in a strip-club for example - you are speaking to her, and if she thinks that you are not going to give her the money, then she doesn't know why you are talking to her - not in a rude way, she just doesn't understand why you are there - it's not clear. And if you were just 'looking for a chat' and she understood your motivations to plain and simply be 'just that' well, she might feel a little 'ripped off' because basically she has lost earnings, because you spoke to her. so in essence plus the

opportunity cost of speaking to you when she could be speaking to someone else - she has lost double. In this example, the girl values earning, but doesn't value taking off her clothes - she doesn't see that as a big deal, I doubt she even thinks about it. It never crosses her mind. Yet if you were to walk up to 'the exact same girl' you know 'that girl' but in this reality she doesn't actually work as a stripper - but she easily could - it's just never crossed her mind if you were to offer 'that girl' in a cocktail lounge - the same money, or double the money to take off her clothes - she would slap you. The reason for this is she see's taking off her clothes as a big deal, or an opportunity cost - to her going out and drinking - the less time she spends drinking, and the more time she spends earning money - the less time she gets to enjoy her partying - drinking with her friends. Because she doesn't value the money, then she won't accept it. Either though she is in this example the same girl as the stripper. Take the example of a girl in a strip club who you have a genuine conversation about what she expects to achieve in her life, like what her goals and passions are, and she opens up to you about her interests and how she isn't moving towards them, and now you talk about love and happiness. Now suddenly the money she is getting from doing the strip job is worthless, because it contradicts with - her philosophy - her goals, what she is wanting and expecting to achieve with her life and time. She almost won't won't to work that evening, she might even consider pretending to be sick so that she can finish work early... or she might just walk out altogether.

Take me for example, I refused all my life to get a job, because I thought "Why am i working when I could be doing hypnosis" the money wasn't worth it, even when I was teaching a pick up artist course - I was thinking "Why am I teaching a pua course, all I want to do is do street hypnosis" - sure we try and convince ourselves that what we are doing makes sense. "If I teach pick up arts then it makes me a more diverse teacher, and besides its a bit like street hypnosis anyway, and I can still demonstrate lots of hypnosis related stuff". By incorporating our values - underlying philosophy into what we do makes suddenly doing it seem acceptable again. It's quite easy to play people's motivations like this, If people aren't motivated to do something they pretty much can't make themselves do something they don't want to do - there is like nothing you can say to change their mind - in fact any attempts to make them change their mind will just piss them off. People quickly don't understand why your not 'getting it' why aren't you understanding what they are trying to do - it makes them think 'he's against me - this person is the enemy that has destroyed my life'. I don't know what kind of people you meet, but I would assume that most people you meet are either in two categories (even though I argue there are three categories of person) - 'suicidal because they don't know how to achieve their dreams' , 'delaying their dreams till later' and the third one 'self actualization', sometimes I call it 'flow' it's like a kind of 'honest living'. Your aim in life shouldn't be to have less than you had yesterday either. nor should it be to have more than you had

yesterday. It should be to be able to have more tomorrow than you had today. This is the third place of living. With the first and second examples relating to those types we mentioned. The quick way to spot someone who is living the third way is to say to yourself "Would I hire this person I'm speaking to?", "Can I trust them to actually carry out their promises - on time - and do more than they said they would'. Or think of it this way - if you were to lend this person money, do you think they would turn it into their dreams. or do you think they would just frit it away on excess - inefficiency. One important thing to remember about humans is we have a tendency to consume too much, if you leave a monkey in a cage with cocaine on one side and food on the other. The monkey will just keep on taking the cocaine until it dies with a big smile on its face - and won't have eaten any food. Even if the coke didn't kill it what would have killed it is the starvation. Take the example of food consumption, I've just eaten 70% of a pack of nuts. I don't want to eat 70% of a big pack of nuts - it's far too much its only 9 am and I know my stomach can't take it, so what will follow is a bout of tiredness and then I will be unable to write and think succinctly and thus I will lose the best part of my writing day down to poor allocation of resources. It's this mis-allocation of attention that causes all human suffering. Take me for example, I've had a bit of a dis-enjoyable week, basically I have to move out of the place I'm living in because my housemates are too noisy. this isn't an ideal situation, I've delayed doing this for about a month maybe more because I was honestly finding it impossible to do work on my

businesses (particularly writing books and recording audios some of my top priorities) during the evenings. Because of this I began fantasizing about my own place, and counting the days until I can eventually end the contract where I am currently living and move into my own place. Now because I'm so focused on the future - suddenly that's made me feel so stressed in the present and suddenly life has become less enjoyable. My productivity in the evenings which was bad anyway because of the noise has now got even worse because of my focus on the future. Right, let's get back on topic. Let's go back to the point I largely started this article on -> time value of money! Now people understand how this concept relates to money, but they don't quite understand how it relates to using your allocation of attention. Let me explain what I mean - I used to do an awful habit that made me unsuccessful -> I would drive down the motorway to a meeting or whatever, and while I was driving down the motorway I would imagine all the projects that I wanted to complete, and as I became more ambitious I would want to get to my destination faster - and become more frustrated that I couldn't reach my destination to start working on my projects. By the time I reached my destination - I had no energy left, I was tired from the driving, I was tired from already running my brain at a million miles an hour - I had wasted all the energy imagining doing my projects instead of actually doing them.

You know how when you go to a place for the first time, it seems all beautiful and stuff - you think "aww the people here are so nice" - but when you have already been to a place a few times your pupils don't dilate - you aren't having an active learning experience as you interact with an ongoing changing environment. Well - this same process of becoming immune to the environment around you - happens with your own goals when you think them through. I know it sucks! So don't think about your goals, just do the best you can do at the time with the opportunities available to you. You see alot of people in the magic and hypnosis world - or any industry - mirror betting, people they believe are good players! What that means is people try and get the same opportunities as that person they are copying as open to them. But this isn't a load of good if the person you're copying has lived in Vegas for years, has loads of connections, had a morgage with their wife before they did hypnosis - re mortgaged their house and now intends on doing a stage hypnosis show with the money. All you see is the end result - they are a stage hypnotist in Vegas. What your better focusing on is what you can do on a day by day basis, what are the common trends in your life and how can you make the best out of each second of opportunity you already have. I know someone who isn't particularly bright - who makes more money doing stuff that doesn't sound awesome enough to be covered in fortune magazine, and he just makes his weekly decisions by his connections, and what he's got. And I know for a fact he makes far more money than big companies pretending to be big, showing off with flashy stuff. Because that isn't the

resources they have got - they are misallocating their time and effort into a pursuit that doesn't work with what they've got. The capitalism system should ensure that value is distributed fairly. This kind of happens - you'll find friends of yours press you for a free drink, or to buy them lunch. Maybe they get their wallet out last, they seem to delay whenever it comes to getting a drink. When they are pushed, they might say "oh my left my wallet in the car" - this really comes down to the different thing's people value - see that person values their money more highly, sure the reason why they value it more might be down to them having less of it. Or maybe the reason why they value the money more is just simply that they do appreciate money. What they are doing is testing you - "do you value money, or do you value something else?" If they value the time spent in the pursuit you are currently in in a bar perhaps likely to meet girls, more than you value money. Then what will happen is they will buy drinks for you and them. Whereas if when it comes to buying you a drink also they no longer think the pursuit of 'been together - and likely in a bar' is worthwhile then what will happen is they will ask you "you got your cards though, they accept card here?" When individuals bargain with one another for power, the one who admits they need something the most loses, and the other one feels more powerful. This acts as powerful anchor in the other individuals mind. In attraction, the common saying goes “whoever admits they are attracted first loses”, this further emphasizes the concept of direct with indirect. It could be said in economic terms that, whoever reveals their plan in the

negotiation first is likely to lose a significant portion of the surplus they could have captured. Being non-valuable, is unattractive and unpersuasive. See for years I fell for my friends who said “hey, I left my money in the car, but should we have a drink”. I fell for it, and I felt like everyone was selfish and they didn't seem to care. So I would buy them drinks, but I would be annoyed how they didn't understand - the reason for this was because I was 'out' because I wanted to do street hypnosis, and I believed 'buying a friend a drink' was a good excuse to be out, and be social, and to keep a solid base in the environment. But it's not that people are sneaky. It's just they are doing 'a test' to see how worthwhile the exchange is to them. It's just the capitalist system - probably embedded within human nature. It's this same allocation of resources based on what people desire most, that you can use to have people do whatever you want. Like in the start of this explanation of the future pace, bait and switch - I explained that in order to gain the opportunity to live with someone and have them become my girlfriend what I did was have them imagine going on a holiday together in the future. By doing this meant that the present day today was modified. And the same goes for my ex girlfriend, the way that I won her back was by claiming that I coincidentally would be visiting her city in two weeks time, in order so I can really just turn up in a few hours - so practically meeting her this evening. Since telling a friend this strategy in October, he decided to take it upon himself to get a job that he never usually would be able

to have. This friend really hadn't had a job before and had been out of work since University which was a couple of years earlier. What he did was he invented a series of jobs that were similar to the role he was looking to do but weren't exactly the same thing, he put these companies on his CV and then invented two more that would be jobs with friends, in unrelated thing's which he would use as his work references if that came up. The main thing with job applications is having them believe that you will highly perform in the role, in order to get them to accept the role today. In other words, for them to give you a job that - for you should pay better and be better than your last and should be exciting because you've never done it before and thus its a learning experience - whereas for the employer they want someone who has worked the job for years is an absolute pro at it, and also has a broad range of knowledge and inspiration skills from other lines of work that they can bring into the company. So there is this weird balance that you need to achieve. The thing is if you are merely lying about doing a job that you're applying for then what will happen is the company you are applying for would plainly see the obviousness that you didn't seem to have a day to day working understanding of your job role - when you are asked, so what did you do mainly for the last six months, and what did your typical week look like, oh and did you go to the networking meetings - you must know Sandra? And you're there - and of course because this is all fabricated then you don't know Sandra, then you've got a real issue right? This is why you can't simply claim that you've already been a billionaire, in order to get a job managing the money and businesses of a big-millionaire.

Instead what you can do is build roles around it that are similar, and bring the role to 'managing the money of a millionaire' to be even better - to make you even more unique for it - because of all the stuff that fits together perfectly within you. People tend to have this kind of magical thinking - there is this whole archetype, mythological poetic story telling thing coming on, and sometimes we fall in love because all the pieces just click together when its just that the story sounds poetic. Well similarly people tend to love these poetic fairy tales when they are first judging something or someone. So you need to build up the myth. So let's flip this around; We've spent a great amount of time showing how the future pace, bait & switch already happens to you plenty throughout your life, now what we need to do is have further explanations on how you can actually use this on people. Suppose there was a girl that I fancy, - maybe I know her perhaps I find out that she likes Amsterdam, or that she likes Snowboarding. I ask her about her travels, I tell her about Ski Lodges, or the Little bridges in Amsterdam and how its so beautiful and how europeans are so friendly, so handsome, and so well dressed. I even imply that she's likely to have sex with a french guy, or some exotic european from Amsterdam. And perhaps she could even learn a language and move there someday. Boom, so the dream is sold right? So now all I need to do is use this to make her my girlfriend - as that was my original intention. Now to say something as obvious as "haha, maybe we should get married and move to Amsterdam" is probably what some shitty pua book would recommend to you - well to be fair

its not as shitty as most - and that actually is based in some semisound psychology. However what would be by far superior would be something like the following "You know, there is a University Coach trip going to amsterdam," or " you know next time I'm in Amsterdam on business (false excuse) you should come, we can go partying" Now don't say anything that will imply your likely to sleep together (your goal) because at this point she will be sniffing you out trying to smell if you have any intentions like that - if she discovers you have that then you're screwed. So you might say something like "haha, maybe even smoke some weed" now guys I don't actually smoke weed, but I'm just trying to make the point that you've got to get something to kill the awkwardness - you're basically trying to quickly throw her off the plotline so she doesn't' consider the sex. Anyway, now that she's pretty much indirectly accepted that you're going to share a hotel room together in Amsterdam - at least in her Imagination. Then what you have done is destroyed her ability to be in the present - Instantly she is going to want to go Amsterdam, and if she has a boyfriend - she doesn't want him anymore. She doesn't want to go to work tomorrow or study in University or talk to her parents about "how her day as been" all that sucks and is a distraction, it detracts from what she wants to achieve - she wants to go amsterdam. If her passion is rock climbing, but now she wants to go Amsterdam. Well now she wants to go to bars in Amsterdam and talk about her rock climbing experiences. And when she goes to rock climb the next day after your conversation - she's not quite sure why but she doesn't really feel like she is enjoying it.

You also are killing her other holiday plans - I mean - "why amsterdam?" she could have gone anywhere in the world.. why choose there, but now suddenly she doesn't seem to have any other options. Not only that but you need to think that people tend to a maximum of two countries a year - you've really just ensured that one of those cities in Amsterdam. Not only that, but why a holiday in the first place - What about saving up for a new house, what about betting money on the stock market, what about her plans to progress her career or get engaged to her boyfriend, or buy her mum a new laptop. - These all go out of the window. By her indirectly agreeing to sleep in a hotel room with you in the future, she now will happily sleep with, or live with, or go with you somewhere - tonight. - you know the future holiday was entirely fabricated - you just made up the entire storyline, everything you said. See, I have to admit this does all sound a little bit like the Seduction pattern "Accelerated reality" or the NLP Pattern "future pace" but it's not actually the same. Let me give you an explanation why. Now I'm a bit of a fan of the accelerated reality pattern, but I would be lying if I said this is something that I've used regularly myself, it's something that I've seen others use, and it's something that I've used a handful of times when I've felt a bit like trying out different approaches to persuasion and hypnosis but its never been something that I've felt like it was my own. So, one of the examples that really sticks out for me every time it comes onto the topic of the accelerated reality is one time my friend - Morton was in this bar in Leicester, what happened was

he said a bit of a cheeky line to a girl, something like "how you doing love?" and she said "i've got a boyfriend", to which he said something like "really, what does he do?" she replied something like "he's training to be a lawyer and then Morton asked "what are you going to be when your older?" (by this point he clearly had in his head his direction - he was aiming to give the accelerated reality a shot and see where it leads. So what happened was she said "I'm going to be a doctor," to which Morton replied "I'm going to be a Musician, I play Guitar and do gigs," she said something like "oh right" now this would be an attempt to cancel what he said - this happens alot in conversation there is all these random attempts to test the limits of what someone is saying - typically you have to explain thing's alot for someone to understand - really until they genuinely repeat back the phrase themselves "A guy I met is a guitar player" then until they say that - then you don't actually exist and your not actually a guitar player. You need to realize that people don't actually realize they exist. I know this is a bit of a bizzare thing to say, - your talking to an ego centric child who plays with Lego blocks and because they've built themselves a Castle then they currently believe they are king of the castle, and if they play with a Barbie then they do actually believe they are Barbie. There might be a doctor version of ken, but he doesn't exist until there is some kind of storyline - do you see what I mean - so ... Until Barbie breaks her leg riding a horse then Ken isn't actually a doctor, in fact Ken might not actually exist altogether. So it's not really Barbie who is Barbie - its the girl playing with the Barbie who is Barbie because her attention and awareness

moves to the opportunities of which she is aware, and she is only aware of opportunities that provide economic benefit. So with the girl in the story with Morton she said "oh right" after he said he is a guitar player. So now she's clearly not engaged with the story, so he says something like "what kind of house do you imagine owning" she says "somewhere big" he says "yeah, we could afford that with you being a doctor, I'd look after the kids while your at work in the day... " and then pause "and then my gigs would usually be on a friday, I book them around the schedule." now because she's feeling you're coming onto her now you need to detract and step back slightly - "it would never work" by saying this you imply that you're not coming onto her "because some nights, even though we've been together for years, you'd be annoyed because i'd be asleep, and sometimes I'd want to see you more often". Now at this point Morton felt like he had overstepped the mark, and that she was clocking onto him, so what he said was "anyway, hows your night tonight babe" she said "yeah, its good", he said "what about your boyfriend" she said "Huh, your my boyfriend?". She had actually fully ended up believing that he was her boyfriend - now even though this is clearly a dramatic response, these kind of subtle - semi beliefs - always are ongoing in peoples heads. “All actions, mundane or novel, planned or unplanned, hypnotic or otherwise, are at the moment of activation, initiated automatically, rather than by conscious intention” libet (1985) Dennett (1991) Actions are prepared for automatic activation by response sets.

Priming and association also applies to the automatic activation of attitudes. “Psychologist Russell Fazio (1989) shows attitudes can be triggered automatically, without deliberation. The automatic activation perspective treats the mind as a place where massive amounts of information is stored. As in a library, some of this information is easy to access. Most information is connected by pathways to other pieces of information, and activating one piece may activate others connected to it. Connections may vary in strength, and those we access regularly will typically become more accessible than those we access rarely, just as places we travel to frequently become easier to find”. . Larson: (2009:96) People tend to choose a life path of best fit, rather than make rapid and seemingly erratic movements irrelevant of previous motions, like a purely economic agent would (if they could). In the future pace, bait & switch. its the subtle belief that "one day we might share a hotel room together" that now makes it acceptable to sleep together or now live together. What makes the accelerated reality different to the future-pace, bait & switch is in the accelerated reality - the basic principle is that you have the person in the future believe that you are both together - for example in Morton's case married to the girl - in order to bring it back to the present and make it seem as if it makes sense to be together today. Whereas in the future-pace, bait & switch what you are aiming to do is some kind of reverse Zen-Buddhism... you're purposely trying to refocus their future and past in order to destroy the present and offer solutions, not by accelerating to a reality where you are both together, but instead by having them dream of a

future and making them incapable of achieving it independently. You also are not purposely making them believe that they are with you in the future. For example in order to get money out of a stranger with the future-pace, bait and switch... you wouldn't make them believe that you are married in the future. Instead what you might do is have them and you set up a company in the imagined future that is worth alot of money because of some million dollar idea. And then as a result, ask for them to lend you money in the present. They will lend you the money (un-related to the pretend false business) they will lend it you as a favour in order to get you to like them more - their intention - because currently they will feel incapable of achieving the future business goal - and this helplessness is because you've made them focus on something that is only achievable over time, and unachievable in the present. They presently feel incapable, so thus in order to make up for their huge loss, then attempt to buy-back shares in yourself in order so the future millions can still be kept. Even though its highly improbable that the future business will work, this really doesn't matter because in that moment the person still has the pathways open that it should work, they want it to work - it doesn't matter if its possible or not. It's that little voice inside yourself that says "I deserve to win the lottery", "maybe god does exist and all the good deeds in my life, he's watching, and he's telling me that if I buy this lottery ticket, then this time he's watching and he'll help me out". Even if you don't believe in God, even if you know the odds of winning the lottery are so impossibly small - it really doesn't

matter. Because the human attention, opportunity seeking action inside humans really isn't capable of holding many different sets of information open at the same time, then you're really just stuck with those ones. It suddenly becomes just a choice of whether you get a lottery ticket or not. I will explain why the Future-Pace, bait & switch isn't the same as the 'future pace' from NLP. Well in NLP, take it in a smoking session - an NLP practitioner might say, "see yourself in the future, you've got clean fresh breath, your clothes smell fresh, your happy, your teeth are white, and your kids are proud of you. You wife knows that you're not wasting your health, and the money in the bank saved from those five pounds a pack is going towards a family holiday". The idea is, in the future you imagine a fully involved imagining of "Being a nonsmoker" that means that currently in the present you will have a rich sense of what it's like to be a non-smoker, the benefits. and that, "feeling fresh" in the future, allows the person to experience the sense of "feeling fresh now" The problem with the future pace - in NLP is pretty simple. If you make a hard and fast rule like "you won't smoke in the future" then suddenly what happens if you have one cigarette on a night out on a saturday, suddenly you view yourself as a nonsmoker. Take me for example, I was making some decent money teaching Pick up artist courses. But I was annoyed, frustrated and a little bit upset, I wanted to be a millionaire off teaching hypnosis - I wanted the whole she-bang, I wanted the TV series of street hypnosis, and every second I was wasting time on a project that made 'good money' rather than investing it into a project that would be 'The Project' that would be the one that made me 'A

star!" the thing is though, that's a little bit short sighted to want to be 'The Star' because your not looking at the day by day progress, the actual things you can do and are doing in the moment, the opportunities that are the best opportunities for you at that moment in time. The critical tasks that need doing. By setting the goal "I'm smoke free in the future" then suddenly if your not smoke free today then their is a bit of a conflict, you hear so many people say "I've got to stop spending so much money" and then you see them go down the supermarket and buy "crisps" when you need to wonder - "What nutritional value are you gaining from Crisps?" So the reason that you are consuming the crisps is in order to eat? and your eating because? So people saying "I need to stop spending money" is something they are referring to in the future where they seem to have loads of savings and they haven't done anything like that in the past. But the past is today, and really that means just focusing on what you can do today - eating healthy, buying the cheapest healthiest food. Idle promises about the future are really just stupid. Because you've got to take what life throws at you - and life often only gives you the tiniest inch of opportunity, but life will never give up on you, that one inch is enough - just think of ebay a company built from nothing that blew up to be everything. Just do only what you've got. (Check out the video: Hip Hop Preacher) So how can you get someone to hand you over cold hard cash using the Future Pace, Bait & Switch as a persuasion tool. Well, in order to get someone to hand you over money today you either need to make money irrelevant - this either means mentally increasing the amount of money they have in their

head - or making some other focus in their life more important and then they don't' care - just think of how many people give up their entire lifes savings for their kids. Or how many guys when their marriage breaks up just say to their wife "you keep the house" they say "oh I don't need the money" but really what's happened is they are just gutted about the women situation in their life, the trust issues - that becomes the most important issue in their life. They couldn't really care about whether that means you're bankrupt or not - it doesn't really make a difference if you're a millionaire or not if your life sucks. Well that's the thing. The strategy that I would sometimes pull when I was in Ibiza and I wanted some quick money was just to make people feel really confident in their ability to earn big money in the future, make them believe that they have everything they need to be mega successful in their life, balloon their ego, make them feel confident in their ability - but try also to make them feel the pressure of being in the present and not having that. this learned helplessness will cause them to hand you cash now. You would need to say something to cause the trigger. "I'm going to go the bar and get some drinks. " and then hope that they offer you the cash - they usually will when you've been through that story. I know its a little cheap but I'm trying to prove the point here about how the system works. It might seem a little dark - but the reality is that people actually do this to you all the time. Just think about every time a friend says something to you like the following - they say, “It’s my birthday, let’s go for some drinks, cheer me up mate... we might find some girls” how many

times have you heard that line, and you convince yourself that its OK to spend 40 pounds on drinks for yourself, because you see the big prize “getting girls” and then you think “aww its my friends birthday anyway,” then you buy your friend a few drinks. Anyway a few days later he says “yeah we didn’t get any girls last time, don’t know what happened, hah, let’s go do it this time” and now because you’ve spent that one time with that friend and now you're familiar and comfortable with it, and the opportunity to get girls is still there then you're happy to spend the money again, give your friend attention, and perhaps buy him more drinks. Before the end of it, you’ve actually spent thousands, maybe even ten’s of thousands because your friend has managed to pull the sneaky future pace bait and switch on you. Just to confirm how it works again I'm going to repeat myself on a story, remember when I wanted to go out with a girl actually I wanted to live with this girl, it was an impossible situation - by the looks of it - but really any situation is changeable. A girl is a girl, she is just trying to make the best out of the opportunities she has, but the money you change her value system then suddenly she won't appreciate the thing's she's currently got (until they've gone). "you don't know what you've got till it's gone". So what's the smart thing to do when a girl says to you "I've got a boyfriend" you've got to pull out the future-pace, bait & switch technique. - it's simply the smartest move that you could possibly make.

So say something like the following; “hey, you know with the money I have now I was thinking I could be going on holiday once a week, have you been barcelona it’s like the most beautiful place ever? Actually I’ve never been to rome, have you been?... maybe we should go one time... just as a laugh, it would be fun... meet some people catch the sun”. Notice how I said “meet some people” this immediately takes the emphasis and implication that I’m trying to take her on holiday in order to ‘get with her’ and throws that onto her motivation for wanting to ‘party’ and ‘meet guys’ aka, meet guys she can have risk free sex with, without her boyfriend finding out - because its in a different country - and without her getting with me, because she wouldn’t allow that to happen because she doesn’t want to cheat on her boyfriend consciously, but she can’t deny the motivation that somewhere in the world, perhaps rome, perhaps paris, there is elegant men walking around in European tailored suits, with muscles, carrying around briefcases, who are witty and charming and romantic. That’s the dream right? I’ve got to sell that dream, help her achieve it mentally, and then use this as the Future-Pace-Bait and then switch out that goal, to replace it to end up living with her before that date is up. So I mentioned that perhaps we should go away for a weekend or something in March, therefore I knew that moving in with her ‘next month’ in November, was a realistic goal when I said this to her in October (A little bit sneaky) knowing that the holiday in Rome in March, probably isn’t really my intention, that its just fabricated in order to have the opportunity to end up being her boyfriend in November, and move in with her.

It’s really sneaky. If you’ve read the other book I wrote called “Convert” that book was about tactics I used to win back my ex girlfriend. If you remember one of the main methods, that got me my first meeting with her after over a year of her basically saying “don’t speak to me else I’ll call to police” I managed to actually find a way where she would be able to go on a date with me, and ultimately led to us being back together again... like a couple. What was this way that I did it? Well, it was a Sunday Night I believe, and I knew about this tactic of doing the ‘downsell’ actually this sounds like this story is going to be a separate trick to the pace-bait-and-switch that I’m talking about. Anyway, I heard a really cool thing that It was better to down sell than to up sell. Let me explain what I mean, a up sell is when you get someone to have a free product from your website, in exchange to get their email address, then you offer them a small entry level product via email that you know they can afford to pay, and would easily just hit ‘buy’ just as a punt, just a quick press of a button just because they can press buttons. So this product might be priced like $7.95 something small, in this product you reveal the secret behind all your information. Like the real 7 Key’s that make your system great, you explain exactly why these secrets work, the person gets to learn this and begins to see how awesome they are. Then you upsell them to the $97 technique, and then the full technique at $197 traditionally, with that they will know everything. And then for all the premium guys, you bundle it. so you say $240 for the whole thing + bonuses.

However, I realized the power of negotiation from a high anchor point and then lowering it, for example suppose you see a price for a product at the top of a sales letter that says “$1,999” and then as you get lower down the letter you suddenly see “Now $499” Well suddenly you don’t really care about paying, as far as you're concerned you want to buy it because you were already reading about how good it was, and thinking about whether it’s worth it at the 1999 level, and now suddenly you're considering whether its worth it at 499, well you're going to conclude - of course its worth it - i mean you wouldn’t have been wasting your time reading the letter when it was 1999 if at least you couldn’t slightly believe, and understand why it could be worth that 1999 price. Therefore you probably value the product at somewhere near that level, then suddenly your having the product dramatically reduced in value. This is bound to work! Well, I realized with that girl, that if I was going to get her back then I was going to have to pull out some sneaky tactics. So what I decided to do was say “Hey, I've got a meeting sometime not this week, but next week on Wednesday maybe we could have a quick coffee if you're about, it will only be a quick one, as I wil have only a few minutes possible during lunch, maybe 15 minutes, sounds ok yeah?” She says “yeah maybe, not this Wednesday, next Wednesday... hmmm, ok maybe”.Boom! that was totally my ‘in’. I said cool, I decided to end the call fairly briefly telling her I was busy and had to go. The truth was I didn't have a meeting in her city at all, the meeting was entirely fabricated, I was just saying that using a false time constraint so she didn't feel threatened, I put the meeting a reasonable time in the future so that she didn’t have to

deal with the stress of making a serious decision about whether to meet with her ex when she had a boyfriend now. This is like when you buy a mobile phone they tell you “Hey, this phone comes with insurance, you don’t need to do anything about it, they send out a information pack about how the phone is protected, just read through that to learn more about it,” then they will talk about something else after the customer says OK, and then they will come back to it, and say “right,can I just get a signature, just sign here to say you accept the terms and conditions of the insurance and are going to renew it in two weeks time when the information comes out, like we said” of course the customer signs it because they already casually agreed but they didn’t fully understand what they were agreeing to. It’s because the ‘dealing with the details of the insurance’ is two weeks out into the future, then they don’t have to deal with the seriousness of signing up to something they can’t get out of for two years - doesn’t seem to matter so much now. Anyway, so knowing that I had this imaginary appointment booked with my ex in two weeks time, this meant that what I now could do is move my theoretical appointment with her to be in the moment. Now, understand, I was desperate to get back with this girl. I wanted her so much, basically I had spent a year saving and earning money through teaching pick up, because I wanted to get back with her. I know crazy right? But I wanted to demonstrate that I was capable of being successful through just teaching hypnosis and that Like I always said I would be.

Anyway, the year was up! We had been apart a year and I was tired of waiting, i’m not the kind of person to wait for things. Or at least I wasn’t in the past, I was the kind of person who was ‘go’, ‘go’ it either happens now or it happens never. that is a really bad attitude though, because projects take time and energy and careful planning. Little ongoing commitments everyday that eventually produce gigantic success. Anyway, so what happened with her was that I called her half an hour later “turns out, the meeting has been changed to tomorrow, don’t worry if you can’t do lunch, I’m just going to go there, I’ll be there before your awake, and after the meeting i’ll drop you a text and see what your upto... right I’ve got to go, its an early start and i’ve got to produce stuff for it first. speak tomorrow” I quite abruptly just went through that sequence, not giving her much time to resist. I drove up there first thing in the morning, i got all nice and dressed well, and I text her saying “ a little early, breakfast?” guessing what time she would be awake. She went for sushi with me, and then we hugged, and the whole thing was timed so nicely, with a few clever words, meant I knew I could repeat this sequence over and over. Which led to a relationship again - I was back inside her head causing trouble. The whole thing was made up! and it worked perfectly, this is the power of the future pace bait and switch. In Marketing a Bait and Switch technique is a common fraudulent technique. The truth is major corporations use it constantly on the general public, and it works! Problem is often it does make the general public really bitter about it. Feeling cheated. Let me explain what the bait and switch usually is. Suppose you have a computer and you have a cheap really good value version

of this computer, you advertise it all over the television so people go flocking to the stores to buy it. Problem is the stores have run out of stock of the really great value cheap computer, but fortunately you have the premium version of this computer with all the great featured, and some bonuses also. People have already gone to the store to buy it, they have already mentally saved up the money in their heads - mental accounting - because they want it. Then when they can’t have it, and the premium product is only a percentage more, they really don’t mind paying that much more anyway People typically are happy to pay 20%-25% more or less (because of anchoring theory) of the product price they were anchored towards. So if you have a 150 pound product, then that runs out of stock, you should expect that the 200 pound product is bought by the consumer anyway when they learn that the 150 pound product has ran out of stock. The thing is, even though the bait and switch technique is illegal under marketing law, its actually very subtle, and you can do it in lots of ways. The way that corporations do it, by ensuring that they run out of copies of their low cost product, - is difficult to prove that they actually fully intended on running out of copies of the low cost product just to use the bait and switch. Of course if you could prove that they did it on purpose then yes they have actually committed fraud. And have purposely misled the general public. Well the technique I have developed is like the bait and switch, but, you do it with a future pace. Like suppose you want someone to be your bitch, (I wrote this to my friend) for example I could say to you "you know, Brighton i'm actually going to do

a PhD there next year.. imagine just focusing a year on hot desking and having the coolest party vibe" I say this knowing that my friend has a big thing for ‘hot desking’ and the idea of free-living without being tied to employment, and I know that he is keen on tourist destinations but yet is wanting something semi safe like UK at the moment, so knowing that Brighton is the right place, and then selling it based on the ‘cool party vibe’ because it screams ‘fun’. This is the future pace part of the equation. Where I get him to emotionally invest into the dream of ‘having it’ Now that this is done, I know that he is willing to work today to make that happen … the cost. Suddenly it makes people more drawn towards liking you, and working with you, and helping you, because they see you as the source of their future goal, or what they need. People always have an absence it’s like how groups lack an economic part to them, you need to look for the quality within people that is in demand but is in short supply, and then you need to become the personification of that character trait. Thats when you do the switch - So I then said to him “... hey, why don't' we build an affiliate campaign of some stuff and sell it to a new clientele like now?” You see, the, the future pace makes it possible, to do the switch. It’s perfect right? Thats’ when I also took the idea of the SuperNeg. This idea is the killer one, so basically you can lock someone down into a certain set of interlocking schema, so what you can do is make someone who has whatever ideas in their head at the time, the background associations that are running, you can make them focus on those associations and be unable to close those brain

sequences, those open neural networks or pathways of associations. The bits of connectome that are receiving bloodflow etc. you can make sure that they are the only ones that receive bloodflow and that the rest of the brain can’t get hold of enough bloodflow to be able to switch thought or task. You do this with the superneg. (in order to do a superneg you must already have the schema-set activated - in order to have done that in the first place you need to have done the peace element, then the creative element, then the learning set - then the focus and the superneg - it might sound like a few elements but really its a very quick sequence of events that quickly brings up an idea in someone's head and locks them down to only being able to think from that psychological ‘frame’). The superneg is the bit where suddenly they are stuck. The way to think of it is this - sometimes you're really creative and free thinking - able to think out of the box, whereas other times you're really focused and wired and you're just able to continue with just one task and you can’t seem to switch off it, you're stuck on it. Well in order to make someone like that you need to raise their emotional levels dramatically and kind of ‘wake them up’ you need to suddenly shock them, so they are like “fuck”. This might mean scaring the person you're speaking to, just to show a brief silly example - it might be that the person you're speaking to briefly for a split second thinks they saw a gun, or they saw a giant spider, but then it turns out there isn’t one. It’s that sudden moment of surprise where they lose themselves and can’t think straight anymore. or that moment a friend is

angry and you try to ask them about something but they can’t seem to listen or understand anything you are talking about because they are so far into the frame they are in and can’t come off it. The superneg just works - I began demonstrating it to a friend. “man, FUCK!”... “You know when stuff just works, and its like you hit the switch, like when you go to play the lottery, and you just know your going to win, because you think to yourself "i feel like i deserve this" Well... what if, you actually did.” So in this example, I scare the guy by saying “Man, Fuck” it’s unclear if i’m saying “fuck you” so immediately I know the guy is going to be listening. I want him to quickly engage with the idea that sometimes stuff just works, because I’m demonstrating the technique of making him believe something.... So, I want him unconsciously to have this sequence I’m doing ‘just work’ and then I pace that response onto “sometimes you feel like your just going to win” because “you deserve it” so suddenly I’m talking to his ego and making it feel big. And then I say “what if you actually did” so I’m making him believe he’s kind of won the lottery in order to get deals out of him immediately in the present, deals that would be worth a significant amount of capital for myself. I then explained to him what I did, I said “So in this example, so now being the idea is the peace to free think, in the future pace, allowed the switch, which was the locked down, with the rush of adrenaline in the superneg, ... bitch” So the reason why I put the ‘bitch’ on the end was in order to make his adrenaline literally ‘lock down’ right now and take the

data in that I just said - so that I was kind of hypnotizing him, to understand the affect of the future-bait and switch technique, so that he would both think i was clever, and be able to use the technique for himself. … and thirdly, if he believes the technique is real, then the technique will be processed when I use it on him. therefore allowing me to control him by using the sequence me and him have now set up, because his brain will automatically begin putting the patterns I specify in this format, into the boxes, and it will influence him as a result.

Attention From Groups In the other eBook “Get money out of Strangers” by Vince Lynch, what we explain is a method to suddenly take on a role as a team-member of a group, but purposely selecting roles that are necessary within a group dynamic but are currently missing and absent in supply. This high in demand role such as ‘Leadership’ or ‘second in command’ or ‘friendly mid level player’ is a position that you can take if you believe the benefits of taking it mean group integration, or will allow you to achieve various goals from that position. For example; in the ebook mentioned, I might join a group that is absent of a leader (geeky guys) and act really cool, and social, and make conversation, and stories, games and activities to bring their personalities out… I could also use these guys and join a group such as a group full of girls that already has a female leader.. and thus leadership perhaps impossible, and in that group I join a low level position, such as “joker” or whatever and thereby I have managed to provide the geeky guys with girls and the group of girls with entertainment, using this setup I have created then I could steal off the surplus created

by my value-creating opportunity, for example… I know the guys are having a good night and might thus dedicate their entire holiday budget to ensuring this night is the one… thus suddenly £400 pounds from each guy is suddenly available to spend in their pocket, providing I provide the product or service… this is all achieved just through a change in attitude, in the economics of the situation that I have created from just taking on different characters and personas based on what I believe the groups around me desire. Increasing the amount of touching , sharing of secrets, and small favours, quickly means that people will feel deeply involved in the relationship between you and them. But how do you create the first initial interaction? In a social situation, like a party, pool party, house warming, event or nightclub, creating interest & attention means being the most watched person in the venue; to create this effect we can look to the advice of peacocking, which suggests wearing outlandish clothing & accessories to create attention, also we can look to ways to heat up a venue, by getting to know as many people as possible, a small greeting such as “Hey, how are you doing” is enough for an initial greeting to have that person pay attention to you for the rest of the night. The majority of my success as a teenager at attracting the opposite sex was mainly down to eye contact, a smile like you can't help yourself but reveal it, with a mouthed “Hey” for them to lip-read. This is fine for an opener. Providing your confident, it will come across brilliant.

Compliance Tests & Microcalibration Once you've used the techniques to create a New Frame in someone’s mind, or if you want to test whether someone was

already responding to you, its importance to run some compliance tests. These tests often not only have the effect of testing to see if someone is responsive to you, but often build responsiveness. You can, point and ask the person to stand over there, (indicating with two fingers) where to stand, instead of where they are. And see if they respond and stand in the exact same spot. If they do its likely that they are hypersensitive to your rules, and therefore likely to accept more ambitious suggestions. I've noticed that when you ask someone to cut a deck of playing cards, that you can first indicate how to cut them off, and if the individual you demonstrated this to, cuts off the exact same amount of cards (just a rough guesstimate) then they are once again hypersensitive to your rule setting, and unconsciously treat it superstitiously. You can, when going for a handshake, (or just in conversation) leave their arm in an awkward position, hanging in the air, and see if they leave it held in that position even after you've walked away. If they have then it would seem they've treated your implied reality superstitiously. Many magic routines such as, Think of a color? (nearly everyone says red), think of a number between one and ten (nearly everyone says seven) only work on individuals who are quick to respond to your suggestion, and take their first thought of number or color as rule. This quick decision making in response to your requests, demonstrations their hypersensitivity. As opposed to individuals who on purposely try to think of a complicated number or color to dupe you (such as nine and pink).

If you ask them to look at something, or pass them something, like your business card, you watch how long they look at that single item for without their attention flickering onto something more emergent. If they treat what you suggest with a degree of undivided attention, then their attention is hyper-directed by your priming. This is similar to how pickpockets, manage to steal your wallet! “In everyday life Professional pickpockets make use of directional cues by bumping into a person or stepping on toes to direct attention to the spot bumped on or stepped on, and away from the pocket (Nardi,. P. 1984 p8) through the initial interaction of attention they can guide the awareness of the subject to a series of events that leads the victim to believe that they were merely bumped into rather than robbed! Another way of moulding the attention of a subject can physically hold them by the shoulders, occasionally pressing down, and seeing if they move their shoulders down with your subtle request. One way seducers, hypnotists and magicians do this is they may guide their participant around the venue, and do this compliance test throughout the motion. There are more general compliance tests that can be noticed throughout all your interactions; These are noticing those that copy you, that seem to use the exact same words, phrases, facial expressions, or even the overall mind set and philosophies that you seem to hold they almost seem to mimic. You may find that they stand in a similar manner or that they use the same body language.

Conclusions We are going to do an entire summary of the approach, now we can’t cover all the technical aspects of the Sexual Capitalism

system in this final chapter as we have gone through all the details in such depth in the past several hundred pages. And although I could write hundreds more we are going to have to bring some kind of close to this text. I’m going to take this opportunity now to tell you that you have all the techniques that you need - you’ve had the best of my equipment that I’ve spent years using, this really is my philosophical thoughts about the entire approach of covert hypnosis with a particular focus on the ‘getting girls’ pick up artist scene. We goal of the book wasn’t to “kiss girls” although that probably is a good goal - it’s just not the goal we set out to do. Our goal was neither to be a cheesy hypnotic entertainer. Sexual Capitalism is about - what would the world of influence and persuasion look like if Psychology didn’t exist - and can we use these techniques to hijack the consciousness of strangers - so we could convince pretty much anyone to do pretty much anything. - Why you need to find the person you're talking to is interesting, to lead them. People tend to overvalue the thoughts they announce - this is because they think that their thoughts are valuable. If someone assumes their knowledge, thoughts, etc. is valuable and you are trying to win this person over. Then the best thing for you to do is just to work with those open pathways of information that they’ve got activated, and to talk about topics roughly similar to what they are already focusing on. By doing this you can easily lead off into your own goals with the person your talking to -

you are snaking them down an alleyway by being extra nice to them and massaging their ego. If you talk abstractly about the same topic as them - then this will avoid you saying anything too specific that the subject can argue with, and make it seem like you have more knowledge on the topic area than you really have. - Why you need to be emotionally expressive. Being emotionally reflective will make you really popular, as it makes you easier to read, people are attracted to simplicity. When you are cute, like a baby, displaying the full experience of happiness, sadness, the full emotion. And you seem directly reactive to what is happening, if your friend tells you a sad story you suddenly feel really sad.. you don’t act sad, you don’t listen and then be sad.. no you're like a little puppy dog who feels the emotions of the owner, you literally experience the sadness before they begin telling it. And when the vibe goes happy you suddenly feel really happy. - Why you need to be Touchy feely as a person. If you're the type of person who - does - who just reacts - who does - more of a friendly animal than a ‘analytic person’ then you're naturally going to attract other touchy feely animalistic people. In order to display this, you see something you should just spontaneously touch it, you think of something you feel it. You literally connect with the space you're in, you compliment the fabric of someone’s dress, or the softness of someone’s skin, or feel the feeling of the light pattern on the wall compared to the scattered darkness of a shadow. When your like this people seem to understand that feeling and connect on that level too. - Why you should pay attention to how other people walk. Always assume other people are on a drug. Whether it be sugar

and they are all focused in the head and they are too excited and their attention span seems short and they don’t seem to stick to a task for a long amount of time, caffeine with its similar effects. When someone is creative you might see them leaning back and looking up. When a girl is horny, I don’t think we have covered this - we might have, but guys have real ways of detecting their levels girls don’t so, girls might walk funny or thrust when they are trying to detect if something is going on. This happens to some girls most of the time, (extreme cases) and others just around ovulation time. - Why you need to lean in close when you talk to people. So when you lean in close to people not only does it make you appear interested but it gives you a lot of opportunity to do plenty of accidental touching. If the club is noisy then its a good opportunity to talk close. Also one way you having an excuse to lean in close is to talk quietly. When you lean in the close, the idea is you should slowly be stepping back and getting them to lean in to talk to you, as you get close you might get an opportunity to make them want to kiss you (through close facial proximity). - Why you should accidently touch the person you're talking to. By doing accidental touching makes it seem as if you not purposely trying to touch the person and thus it becomes acceptable for you or them to use touch and it ‘not mean anything’. When the touching has become acceptable you should aim to try and make them accidently touch you back. - Why you need to always assume the positive outcome but never mention it.

Let’s take the example of sex - I know its crude but still. The reality is, anyone in the world is going to have sex with you. Unless you’ve forgot, life is incredibly lonely and we are essentially just animals. We pretty much fall for affection, Imagine this, do you know what phenomenology is? Well it’s that sense of your whole life you’ve been misunderstood, that nothing you ever did really meant anything because it never felt that you were actually making an impact over the world. Making someone feel understood - trying to reduce the objects relations they feel by becoming them - and fulfilling their needs will temporarily make the person want to be mothered by you. With the right process it doesn’t matter if someone likes you, it doesn’t matter if they fancy you or not you can still win them over. - Why you should make opportunities to hop into bed with people. Have you ever tried sharing a bed with a girl who you didn’t have any intention of sleeping with but you just found the whole opportunity irrestible at 3am in the morning, and spontaneously even though she doesn’t fancy you she suddenly feels exactly the same. Have you ever seen someone just on the verge of crying but that they are holding it in by trying to appear to be upbeat, but they are just about to break into tears… and suddenly felt a huge feeling of wanting to look after and protect that person… What if everytime you spoke to someone, like the cashier girl when you bought a coffee, or the girl at the checkout in the Clothing outlet suddenly felt that huge emotion? If you’ve ever heard of something called the ‘lip eye triangle’ then you are halfway almost there… There are various human triggers such as rolling up ones bottom lip, fattening out the

muscles in ones face, throwing your pupil dilation to the max, and looking at someone pausing, leaning in 5mm and matching their gentle rock of their movement (everyone has a kind of sway) then all you need to do is look in their left hand eye, then their right hand eye, look and hold your gaze at their lips and then tilt the top of your head 5mm. If you do that, honestly the whole world stops and she spontaneously fancies you, she doesn’t need to like you… Why you should act like the greek god hero cast down to earth to accomplish his destiny while avoiding the fate of achilles. Still to this day there are only really a handful of things wrote about ‘Vince Lynch’ on the internet, One guy on an internet forum said “Thats when I put on my Vince Lynch I’m the Master of the universe thing - and everyone seems to get hypnotized” a friend of mine used to say “Wait till you see Vince Lording” I thought that was cool, basically imagine you have a secret pathway to the Gods, but in exchange for this you suffer some ill-fate. People love this story. Girls love this story - act it out like your really it. Act like you are the person who owns the universe, you are clearly a guy who knows what he wants and how to get it, but for just that brief moment you show a chink in your armour. Everyone loves that because it shows underneath all of us ‘trying to be strong’ we are all human together and thus no longer alone. - Why you should assume your influence is working. Life is almost like a reflection of your mental state. If I believe that I have no customers coming into the business then what happens is I start viewing every conversation I have with a stranger not as an interested potential customer but I start viewing them as “Why are they wanting all this information for free”. You need

to realize that pacing and leading is everything, if someone is already merely exposed to an idea, and where you're wanting to progress them to is somehow related, then providing you just go through the process of moving them towards the goal you have in sight for them without them feel as if they are moving down a progression path, then you will succeed. - Why you should be the quality you’re wanting to find in others. I’d be lying to you if it was that simple as “If you want a good business partner, then be a good business partner?” but that’s not actually that simple. Instead what you should do is think “what would the person I’m speaking to need to believe about me in order for me to achieve the result I want?” and then what you need to do is to change your character and attitude so you come across in that manner. One thing you can do is also think “What kind of person would she need to be in order for me to get my result” and then what you should assume is that the person you are speaking with - is the kind of person who will result in that result - and then you should slowly look for examples of those behaviors in the subject. By looking for those behaviors that endorse your view of them, will give those aspects of their personality focus and life, as your focus will cause them to focus on those elements of their personality and encourage your result. - Why you should make your life easy by working smart. You constantly hear about people who are unhappy with their husband or wife, or someone who isn’t doing as well as they should in their career. There are simple solutions to this, ‘The trend is your friend’ basically you don’t actually need to even wonder how is the best way to proceed in your life, your life will

actually provide the answer to you anyway… it might not be the answer you would like, but ultimately it is the one that will result in the biggest gains. There is always some emerging opportunity - it’s something you’ve never thought of but its knocking at your door and you should take it. - Why you should reduce the amount of stuff you do in your life. Get rid of all the worthless opportunities in your life. You need to take a look at what you do on a regular basis, when you go down the club, or to the bar, or hang out with that friend what exactly are you expecting to achieve? Is that the most worthwhile activity you could be doing or are you just monging out. I’m not being harsh on you, the truth is you want this more than anything. You don’t actually want to be doing the activities that harm you. I’m not actually trying to turn you into a work a holic. IAnd it’s not about the hours it’s actually about doing ONLY the tasks, that actually make the biggest growth the quickest - even if you don’t like ‘those tasks’. - Why you should, mention your line of work or interest with everyone you meet. Speak to people, and present interesting valuable information without alienating them. Mentioning “I’m a hypnotist” is interesting, mention you like “psychology” will probably cause an argument about ‘reading people’, talking about hypnosis for 3 hours will not impress anyone, your best saying too little than too much. If you drop in hints about a subject - you are just fishing to see if they know more - and if they react - only talk about the topics they react to is a cheeky way of sussing out ‘what makes someone hot’ while you're speaking to them. - Why you should choose the easy targets first. If you can’t just go and talk straight with the people you - want the most - or are

being rejected by the people you - want the most - then why not just choose the easy targets first, choose to people who are willing to be easily impressed by you and then move towards their leader (every social group has a leader of the night) after you've hypnotized them or before depending how much risk you wish to take (i.e. its more risk going directly for the leader – but if you still follow the steps through this guide you will understand the responsiveness occurring when you speak to the subjects. - Why you should say statements boldly and hold attention. If you want attention, you should just - act in a way that holds people. There are special ways of asking for people to ‘pay attention’ but you’ve got to be careful how you word it else people may take offense, so it might be better to phrase it in ways such as “I want to show you something". For hypnosis if you want people to pay attention, you should mention that hypnosis requires they listen to you. Sometimes you need to be prepared to ditch anyone who doesn’t follow or play along with your rules, so by being open and upfront by saying “this requires commitment” or “you’ve got to take this seriously” at least then you can ditch the people who aren’t really in it for the long haul. At least if you warn people that what you're offering isn’t easy, then if they fail - they can’t blame you as you did warn them. - Why you should be emotional. By you being really emotionally present, makes it easy to open up to people and find that they will be happy to be emotional with yourself. If you keep the conversation too much about - ego, then ego will become the conversation. You need to avoid those kind of games, else the interaction will become dominated by them.

- Why you should have them experience emotions quickly. By raising their emotion level, often makes people a bit flitty, and clingy. People when they are emotional they tend to seek comfort from other people. Not only that but they tend to lose their creativity, become associative memory is mood dependent then when you are in a sad mood you don’t think the same thoughts, and have the same memories as when you are in a happy mood. If you want people to be emotional, you can just avoid conversations that provoke analytic response, or you can give metaphors that encourage emotions such as "you know when your angry and you can't calm yourself down", "you know when you feel amazing and on top of life and you don't know why" "Hypnosis might be scary, but don’t be scared" – suggestion for being scared, let them know they've dissociated before (like when your angry and can't calm yourself down). “Hypnosis is like, you know when someone keeps questioning why you're sad, then you feel sad, and they ask if you’re going to try and you begin crying?”, “Like when it’s an awkward situation – because you’re not supposed to laugh at something because it’s inappropriate and then your friend says “don’t laugh” and you burst out laughing”. One of the reasons why you have them experience emotions in the interaction is so you’ve got their emotional reactivity onboard early, so the moment you mention an emotion later on - maybe as part of a story - then the subject will automatically be able to bring that emotional element to the story to mind, and thus you will get more rich and engaging responses out of your subjects than you would get - if you simply just told a story without doing the emotional priming set up earlier on. One of the things I used to say when I was young was - “What I’m trying to do is make everyone experience the broadest range of emotions per day as

possible...” I would tell people “ I think if everyone cried, kissed, loved, mourned, was happy, and laughed... each day in the morning... there would never be misunderstandings in the world.” I was only a teenager when I said that - but I really aimed to do that with everyone I spoke to, and my results were through the roof. Either way, it's definitely the technique I follow if I’m setting someone up for covert hypnosis. - Why you should stand up straight. it’s more than just standing up straight, basically you need to lift your chin up and look towards the sky as if your praying to God. yeah I know its weird, but somehow people do this when they are having some kind of spiritual awakening, or are just really interconnected with their surroundings as opposed to being depressed. Almost immediately when you do this - everyone around you will look at you, and remember whenever people are responding to you its because they are experiencing some kind of value, as attention always follows opportunity. - Why you should Widen & dilate your eyes. You want to make your eyes go almost kind of blurry, practice refocusing your eyes until you get the widest angle shot as possible, you want the aperture as low as it can possibly go. You want all the light into your eyes. Now really look at the world as if you were a different person, a person new to the area who had never seen this club, bar, or anything like this place or these people before. Keep this look and look people directly in the eye when you speak to them. Their eyes will dilate in response and they suddenly will feel like they are in a whole different land, the colors will go brighter, and they will feel like life is a lot more vivid and interesting, and you will seem like the most attractive person around.

- Why you should quit coffee, alcohol and smoking - I personally have a bit of a dark theory about alcohol, I personally think that when you get drunk you kind of sell your soul to the devil a little bit. Let me explain what I mean, when I get drunk it’s like a really strong caffeine hit, I have this sudden Euphoria where my life all feels really good, and as if I’m perfectly capable of dealing with it all, suddenly I’m thinking “oh, I dont need to save money…” and I’m thinking “I can afford to do x, this is my life”, “yeah maybe I should travel those 400 miles right now”, I’m thinking “yeah I need to make this list of international calls,” , “oh I love my friends I need to buy them all drinks”. All my goals go out the window, and my wallet goes loose. Now, I never intended on doing any of the thing’s I just listed until I drank, but now that I’ve drank doing those tasks seems like the best thing ever. What happens is my positive emotions become wrapped into caring about tasks, goals and dreams that I don’t really care about. I don’t really care how ‘AMAZING’ this piece of music feels… no I care about my business teaching hypnosis… so why all of a sudden am I experiencing this huge rush with regards to music and suddenly wanting to fly away to Ibiza and become a DJ. Alcohol confuses your brain… - Why you should work hard to make your life the best. I’m not going to write and tell you some more motivational stuff here actually I’m going to remind you about, people seem to like people who are ridiculously hard workers. People who are constantly growing and expanding. Don’t worry about whether people like you or not, holding and maintaining your competitive advantages will make you more attractive by definition. By you going directly after your wants and needs (only) maintains your life force. People are attracted to ‘life force’.

- Why you should link the patterns together. There is no magic line that is going to make someone ‘fall under your spell’ it’s a vibe, its a sequence, its an attitude. Its the overall sense of what you portray. Everything you do must illustrate one rounded coherent point. Let’s show how you can sequence a routine series. So let’s look at the first date routine, you would say “You know when you’re going to go on a date for the first time, and you get really excited…. And it feels like you're just overwhelmed, that you won’t be able to contain yourself, it might even feel as if this person might be able to figure you out too easily or something like you feel naked… you feel so silly and flirty, and you think to yourself, ‘what if he’s the one.’ “ What you’ve done in this sequence is conveyed the feelings of nervousness of going on a date - the feeling of ‘being naked’ and connected it to the final conclusion “what if he is the one” that’s the line you want people to say to themselves in their own head. Now in order to protect yourself if they don’t’ really ‘like you’ yet - then what you do is say something that allows them to explore and discover their feelings for you overtime. So you can say the following script “ I guess that’s the thing you never know whether you should be taken over by the emotion, or if you should just “give it a chance and see how it goes and then you’ll discover the love as you build the relationship…” So then I would continue with that story into the following story by saying, “you know when you go to a party and you just feel completely on top of the world, high on life, and you just feel so amazing, and because you feel so happy you have this confidence, this silly confidence to do anything that just pops into your mind, you just feel totally free things you’d never usually do, it doesn’t matter if its dancing around like a crazy person, licking the floor or skinny dipping, you just are out of control because you feel so confident and happy” because the

first story only focused on bringing up the feelings of potentially wanting to be with someone, the second story focused on making tonight the best night ever and doing things just because they seem like a good idea at the time. You want to turn the first story about - seeing if you like someone - maybe I could see if I can fall for someone tonight, whilst making the fit between all the stories seem logical, and hiding your intentions for why you're telling them. Why you should draw people in. Rather than forcing people It’s the age old question of the carrot or the stick – rather than attempting to ‘make people do things they don’t want to do’. You should focus on creating small opportunities for people by appealing to their ‘needs’. Create the qualities that bring others to you. Why you should encourage people to ‘play up to your expectations’. You know when you have a play fight in school, and you're only kidding around but suddenly they turn nasty. Or you know when in golden age films when the two characters enter a hotel reception to gain the keys to a room - and the receptionist asks “It’s Mr and Mrs Smith isn’t it [Looking inquisitively]?” when really it’s just two friends sharing a hotel room, but they have to confirm “Yes, Smith” in order to uphold manners, but instantly in that moment the possibility of them ‘being together’ is opened up, and you can see that they have almost ‘become together’ just because it was implied by the receptionist. Why you should have others live each day as if its their last. If you live yourself as if its your last, then the problem is that you will place too much emphasis on ‘doing everything’ today, rather than doing the most important tasks for cash flow, for

progress - these tasks are different ones to the ones you would do if you lived each day as if it’s your last. However, you should aim to make the people you meet ‘act as if’ this day is their last, because you want them to invest totally in the present and making stuff happen today, this is a call to action. Saying “you only live once” is offering people the chance to quit the concerns of the future and past, and to live freely without judgement. This is a great way to encourage inner peace within the people you are speaking to; “you know when you just feel like, at peace, like you take a breath right now, and you feel calm… as if its just you and the universe, like it’s a long conversation with the peace of your surroundings, and nothing matters anymore… you can do what you want”. By having people discover inner peace, makes them more open to being able to see the good in any experience or opportunity or any creative pursuit that you can offer them in the moment. If they were distracted by the tasks of the future or the problems of the past, they might judge what you are saying through those lenses. For example you're not going to go to a party tonight if you have work tomorrow. Why you should encourage others to be independent. Encouraging others to be independent makes them more confident in their own decisions, but you might think that if you're going to try and make others do stuff that they wouldn’t usually do that by making them confident in their decision making ability is a bad thing. But making people confident in their decision making ability is like a sure fire way to actually encourage people to make impulsive decisions. Like if you were to tell me right now that I’m independent and I can do whatever I feel, then suddenly I feel like going to the Casino and going to a party.

Why you should only work with people who are listening to you - There’s no point flogging a dead horse, if someone isn’t listening to you and you’ve followed all the steps, you’ve been indirect, you’ve approached and joined the group in a position that is in demand, and you’ve pulled them in, rather than pushed the ideas you're trying to get them to cling onto - and after all this, they still don’t know what you are talking about, if that is the case then you should just ditch them. The best you can do is some kind of line to instruct them to listen and see how they react, by saying “Listen to me carefully here’s what you have to do, focus and commit to listening to the ideas I present, its as if I can talk to the back of your head, I can present ideas that trigger neural pathways that cause actions to occur, and happen effortlessly” obviously that is an overt hypnosis line, if you want to be covert you might say things like “Listen, I want to know something” (attention) “Have you ever?” (question) by using this same kind of formal and demanding language will make the subject still feel like they are being instructed to listen without looking like an overt hypnotist. Why you should look for a certain type subject. You're looking for that emotionally reactive person. Let’s briefly explain what that person is, it’s the type of person who when you smile he just seems to spontaneously smile back. It’s the kind of guy that when you say “You alrite mate?” in a dead cheery voice and then he suddenly seems really chirpy back then you need to think to yourself, “wow that was pretty reactive”. if the person you're speaking to, seems to move while your trying to squeeze past them, then clearly they are aware you exist, they aren’t engrossed in the conversation they are currently in. This means they likely are exactly the kind of person you are looking for. You need that kind of person who is

wide eyed and bushy tailed. The person who is seeing the world with bright eyes for the first time, you tend to see these people a lot in tourist destinations or people who have time off work, or people who have just bought some new clothes that they are proud of, the girl who has just come out of a relationship and is in the bar for the first time in two years or a new haircut that is completely different. These thing’s can trigger people to be open again to new experiences. It should be noted that often you're looking for someone who is really bright - you want someone intelligent because the more intelligent a subject is, the more easily they understand the stories you tell - because they’ll have a greater depth of experience. You're looking for someone who has a good attention span, but someone who is a quick thinker. Also it should be mentioned obviously young adults tend to be a bit more “Wow” about life, so they are good targets also. Why you should target the person on the edge of the social circle. The person on the edge of a social circle – this person is looking for opportunities outside of the typical and therefore is likely already responsive to your requests. Some people seem to be waiting for something different to happen in their life. If you were truly recognized for your talents, for your uniqueness you’d be the center of the circle, the reason they are on the edge is because they believe they are worth more, or are looking for more in life, by you recognizing them for their own uniqueness you are doing something that no one else surrounding them is doing, you’ll win them over with this technique. Why you should assume that people believe the words they are saying, even if they claim they are joking or pretend. Just think of it this way - people aren’t able to lie, simply they can’t lie. So you should assume the words that a subject says is always the exact honest representation of what they are believing in that

moment in time. Most people in order to say something, it must be consistent with their beliefs. So one of the goals you should do, is to have the subject say things that they wouldn’t usually say, because the moment they say the words or phrase - then in that moment they’ve internalized the message. However you need to remember that because people are unable to lie, then if you pressurize someone into a corner and you do force them to answer “No” to you - then you’ve lost them, because they are stuck on it, as people believe the words they tell themselves. Why you should make someone experience peace? Often when someone is really relaxed they are capable of allowing their mind to drift into all kinds of areas of life. You want someone to be able to consider your stories. If you go into a situation when someone is ‘normal’ or someone is ‘playing a game’ then the problem is, everytime you take the conversation in a direction, or you change the interaction then it will be dominated by the ‘frame of the game’ that they are in. For example if you meet someone that is in networking meeting, then they are probably there to ‘network’ so everything you do will be contextualized and trapped within that frame, often by finding a way to break the mould, and make someone experience a huge sense of freedom, to somehow suddenly relax them and speak more causally should allow them to be more able to creatively think and explore any ideas you suggest. In our sequence we make sure someone is peaceful and creative before we start pitching the ideas at them, getting them to adopt the ideas we want to inject from a first person - them understanding - and them re-enacting the thoughts as their own - repeating back the phrases, saying the actual words you want to hear them say, and have them begin to partially carry out activities similar to the desired result.

Why you should perform idea injection? The moment we get someone listening, and paying attention and we know they are gold-dust as they are receptive and open to hear and re-enact ideas that we present to them ‘as if’ they are their own. An idea pitched to someone ‘as if’ it is their own might go something like this. “You know when you see something like X, and it feels like you should just do Y, but then you wonder “maybe I should just do Z”. in this example you’ve brought up a situation and casually asked them to imagine doing it in the first person, then what you’ve done is said what they should do - this is the thing that everyone has told them to do, the thing they don’t want to do... you’ve offered them a choice they would never actually take, but you’ve done that to make the conclusion “Maybe I should do Z” and said that in their own phrasing, this quotation suggestion is designed to be the words they actually say back to themselves. You did this to offer a polar solution to the previously offered position. People tend to think in opposites of “it’s either this or that” by offering a poor choice, and then offering a good one - as part of a story makes people just suddenly accept the final choice. You can get away with quite alot of story telling when you talk in the third person of what someone else would do. “You know when you're really angry”. But in the idea injection stage the main goal is to present the formula of how you want the subject to respond to you for the rest of the time that you interact with them, what you can also do is lay the foundation for an idea that you can later close - for example, if you make someone start to want to be with someone - like thinking about getting into a relationship at this point in this conversation, and then ‘lock down’ that feeling with concentration and emotion. Then the subject will be fairly forced to keep entertaining the wonder about relationships in their life,

and then you can extend (‘pace’) that line of enquiry out later on by relating it to yourself. One cool thing you can do, is build in a suggestion that the subject will pay attention to you, and listen to what you have to say throughout the rest of the interaction. If we were doing formal hypnosis we might say something such as “Listen to me carefully here’s what you have to do, focus and commit to listening to the ideas I present, its as if I can talk to the back of your head, I can present ideas that trigger neural pathways that cause actions to occur, and happen effortlessly”. But being as in this example we are talking about covert hypnosis, you should say something like “you know, I read somewhere that... you know when you look at a word on a piece of paper, you can’t help but read it - this is because whenever someone mentions you kind of think about, so if I mention relationships, then it might make you think about whether you enjoy being single etc. It’s like that thing, where someone says “don’t think of a black cat” and you think of one, or if you're watching a hospital program you can’t eat your eating a steak at the same time... because the idea that you're eating that dead guys liver keeps popping into your head. ” so you always phrase it in this sort of manner, saying something like that, sets the subject up, so that every time you phrase stories in that kind of manner they get a sense of - these words are causing stuff to happen in the back of my head, now that you’ve done that - you just need to tell the right string of stories and conversation pieces, and compliance tests, while doing the sequence we outline and you’ve got a golden subject. Why you should push the person you're speaking to into an erratic state. You know when your playing poker with someone and you just know that they are going to ‘lose their sensibility’ and they are on the verge of ‘playing like an idiot’ rather than

playing the statistics properly, that all you need to do to get them to ‘play erratically’ is push them over the edge, by either putting them into a corner, or ‘stressing them out’ or maybe you need to tell a few jokes around the table to suddenly make the person laugh so they go into a ‘silly mood’ and then they are happy just to bet because they want to have fun. Or if you make someone really inpatient, one way of doing this is to bet really slowly that way you can watch the other player get annoyed at you, and maybe you do this every time you play them, hopefully raising their stress levels. When you raise peoples adrenal levels - it’s not that they get more stupid, they just get more ‘hot headed’ they have more of a - it’s a do or die situation mentality. It becomes that thing where they suddenly can’t think of any other strategy to play, they are too invested in the strategy that they are playing - they are looking out for that ‘big prize’ or trying to avoid losing all of their money, or they have that sudden feeling of ‘I just want to win, I don't care what it takes’ that causes their impatience and causes them to make a rash decision that suddenly irreversibly damages their gameplay. When you're doing covert hypnosis, if you introduce a set of choices, or a few different schema’s early on in the interaction, and then suddenly put the pressure on in the conversation, either because you mildly scared the person, or suddenly you came across dominant, or suddenly you asked the person about “times you were scared in your life?” or “You know when your angry and you can’t’ calm yourself down”, “God, imagine looking out of a plane and someone is telling you to jump, I’m awful being bossed about, it would be awful if someone was trying to push you out of the plane?” I’ve found that alot of people have stage fright so sometimes I say “Man, going on stage is a good feeling, all those people watching you, waiting for you to speak” what you're doing here is your purposely

taking a polar position - saying how easy it is to go on stage you're doing this because you know the person you're speaking to is going to take the opposing position, because you’ve argued a strong position, then people will naturally argue the polar position back just to play devils advocate. In this example you're purposely trying to make them experience stage fright in order to make their behaviour more erratic in the present moment. Why you should push and point at your subject. Sometimes when you are talking to someone, there are quick ways you can raise someones emotion level. Making a little swear word to compound your point, can be used to ‘alarm’ a subject, to suddenly raise their adrenal levels to prepare to react to you insulting them. This needs to be done carefully, I’m utterly nice to my subjects, but if you can for a moment make it seem your mad at them, or for a moment talk in a dominant tone, you often can suddenly make them stuck with the ideas you presented as they consolidate their energy by reducing blood flow to unnecessary areas of the brain, i.e. areas of the brain that aren’t being used to consider the current ongoing information in their environment. Because you’ve already talked about ideas, and things, going on in the environment and those things have a lot of energy attached to them, then suddenly raising their emotions up... closes their chances of ‘thinking of other things’ and leaves them with this set of schemas to be focused on. Why you should use compliance tests, The reason why compliance tests are misunderstood, is because covert hypnotists often think that subjects can pass or fail the compliance test. When really, they are only used for calibration, you just continue to present situations and leap from one to the

next, there is never any risk of it not working because you already know the test you're about to do will work before you do it, because you’ve already built a strong base (‘pace’) place to lead from. Few thoughts that people have, are actual permanent structures, most people will pretty much do - just about anything - given the right situation, all you need to do is create those situational factors and then throw the emotion up and present an ongoing environment that forces them to make choices (‘call to action’) from that first person position that you’ve assumed they are in. The compliance tests shouldn’t be done to ‘test if someone is a good subject’ - everyone is a good subject, instead they are just part of the escalation process of ‘setting up structures (‘schema’s’) that you can come back to later on, and then force the subject to act upon them with limited time, knowledge, but potential reward. Think of it this way until someone tells you, “no that’s never going to happen” then you're actually succeeding at making sure its going to happen. In other words, providing you never actually give them the chance to realize what you're doing and say “it’s never going to happen” then you can keep building these assumptions, structures, bases ‘as if’s until the final moment where you leave them to act upon these ideas - pregnant pause - or silence close. In pick up, the way we can close after building up responses in a girl is by building jealously all of a sudden, and therefore having her need to form an actual decision in her head about how she feels about you, the way we might have set up the structural base of “I fancy him” running somewhere in the back of her head is by saying “You know, I met this girl and she seemed so much happier when she was with her boyfriend. I guess it’s nice to have someone”. and then a few moments later “Hey, I need to go to this club later, pass us your number and maybe I can get you on the guest list”. Then it turns out you didn’t go to the club,

you stayed in the same bar - and seemed dead friendly and ‘such a nice guy’ to her and ran jealousy plotline on her, then suddenly all the ideas that you’ve set up are intergrated all together into one coherent unit of - what's going on in this environment - how do I judge him? and that’s when the first thought of the evening happens... “He’s cute, … hmmm she’s not getting him, is she?”. You're not playing with the thoughts of the subject - not directly anyway, remember that! Why you should integrate the ideas in someones head, long before you address them. Building up an idea in someone's head i.e. “you fancy me”, “I’m fit”, “your turned on”, “this guy is a professional, and he accepts tips” Should happen a long time before you ever do anything that looks like you want anything from the subject, you need to put those ideas in the subjects head whilst they are as relaxed as possible and aren’t busy trying to analytically guess “what does he want from me?” You can’t have them think about work tomorrow and how they’ve got to leave in a moment in order to get bed to be at work in the morning, you can’t have them think about that guy they’ve been seeing and how talking to you is cheating on him. In order to do this you need to first clear the persons head of all of those concerns by not doing anything that might trigger those quick snap judgements about you, it’s less about ‘How can I suggest the subject to do X...’ and more about ‘not setting off any warning signs, at this stage in the game you just need to be building sets of ideas, that are roughly related to your final intended target. Think of this as ‘Brainstorming’ or ‘Mind-mapping’, your trying to get them to free associate ideas about topic X, so what you're doing is ‘jogging their memory’ around it, by mentioning roughly related things, in order so later you can pace X and lead to Y.

Why you should make them jealous. The Schema, has to connect to something external to yourself that’s moving. An idea that’s not in motion, is an idea lost. Remember that when you're building your customer relationship management, the moment that pathway to the ‘shared commonality’ with the person you're speaking to is open, you need to keep ‘tapping it’ saying ‘hello’ to it every couple of days, every few moments, but the idea needs to be actually turned into a moment where suddenly its - all or nothing - if you don’t take it now, that’s it! People need to feel like they are about to lose this thing they have invested in before they take action. Often people aren’t motivated by opportunity, because it isn’t theirs yet. But the moment its about to leave them they are concerned. “the moment an idea is externalised, it’s a reality… not a debatable opinion to be reflected on” “And ideas are realities, when they are paced and lead.. causally linked to externally continuing systems.” In pick up having a jealousy plotline, or a time constraint on the conversation suddenly causes all the setup you’ve done so far suddenly to roll into action, so put the pressure on and deliver a hard hitting close. Why you should imply that others are doing things for you. Don’t shy away from the fact that sometimes people do pure altruistic acts - Getting a girl or getting someone to buy from you or give you something isn’t always that they think they are getting a good deal out of it, or just because they experience a huge amount of positive emotion, sometimes people do things for you as a purely non selfish act - there is definitely a way of encouraging people to act selflessly. “Just do all the things I want” , “You do what I want you to do”, “Just get a keen sense of what I want you to do, you do what I sense you to do”, “Get a

sense of the things I want”, “you want what I want”. “You know when your just playing up a guys expectations” by saying lines like these or having conversations about this topic area will encourage people to turn off their ‘profit seeking microchip’ and go into ‘charitable mode’ the same way at christmas you think “This year I’m not buying christmas presents” but in the end you buy cards, and presents for everyone and feel good about it. Why you should act like this is a high risk, high reward moment. Some situations have that ‘time pressure’, ‘this is your only chance’ kind of feel to them. There was a study done on attraction in nightclubs, and it was said that just before closing time there was a spike in the number of ‘get togethers’, it concluded that the upcoming closing of opportunity made people act upon their impulses. Internet marketers know this well, and will make a landing page that makes you excited, and tell you its a one time opportunity, that the price will change, or the product will run out, this scarcity encourages immediate impulsive response. Jealousy plotline is a pickup routine where you encourage her response by indirect escalation of touch, and then you immediately remove it and talk to her friend or another attractive girl - suddenly condenses into action - her response into actual thoughts and behaviours. Why you should pretend that you’ve known them for years. If you pretend that girl is one you’ve already ‘had a thing with’ then you proceed with her as if you actually could be with her, and act like she is trying to ‘get with you’ then she will actually try and get with you. Sometimes Winking, Big smiling, at someone makes them feel like they know you - and hopefully they will in return assume the same - and thus cause their response, once you have the schema priming response you just

need to turn it into action. This works for other things too, for example; pretending that you’ve done business with someone before makes them so easy to do business with. Assuming you’ve already done a job before makes it so much easier to go to the interview with confidence. One routine that some books suggest is that you say “Wait, that’s my ex girlfriend over there, could you just dance with me for a moment else she’ll try and talk to me” and immediately start dancing with the girl, now you're dancing with her you can progress if you like by saying “hopefully she will think you're my girlfriend” which will cause the girl to temporarily play along and become your imaginary girlfriend. Why you should act as if multiple realities exist. Pretend there is another life where you actually got into a relationship with the person your speaking with - like another dimension where you were happily married with kids, and then occasionally slip into character as if you're acting out that role. There has been a few times where a girl has completely turned me down, or a audience group who I asked if I could perform magic on has turned me down, and I’ve said the line “maybe in another life though.” that one line has won me back relationships that have been completely dead in the water. It’s because its the foot in the door technique, it opens up the possibility that in another life, in another dimension, if only things could have been different - you’d be happily working together, doing business together, or happy together. Why you should talk about stupid abstract things like pizza toppings or what would you bring if we were trapped on an island?

One time I went for a interview to be an entertainer for an energy drinks company. We were split into two teams of twenty in the group interview. In the team I was in there was 19 girls and myself. We were told to make a list of five things to bring with us to an island if abandoned there. Just the fact we were pretending this actually might happen by engaging in the task of selecting what five items we would bring, had everyone engage in the rational of - “He’s the only guy, I’m going to be with him on the Island, would I?”. It’s definitely worth remembering that even considering a hypothetical situation can completely change the way people react with you. Why you should touch others, and imply that everyone likes that comfort. Ok, it’s not that easy just to touch people and make it accidently if you haven’t had the practice. But, some people make it look like the most natural thing. The basic principle is, if you like someone ‘hug them’ if someone says something cute, ‘smile and tap them lightly’ because you're doing these actions and gestures as part of the natural flow of conversation then it doesn’t matter so much, they just seem like they are part of the storytelling. Tapping someone on the back and saying “hey, should we go to the bar and get something?” seems perfectly usual, while making it appropriate to touch. Later on it will be much easier to get to the point where your hand is resting on their hand, or your knees are bumping. Why you should talk about politics, and sad stuff. Be a hippie and talk about changing the world, if you address how people in the world should love each other, that people should care for one another. How there shouldn’t be any wars and how underneath it all you believe that everyone is a good

nice honest person it’s just that they aren’t expressing themselves correctly. Well, when you get all hippie like this then suddenly people start waving their ‘free love’ flag and hopefully you get some very charitable interactions around you where you do ‘share and care’. Often talking about people in the world is a good opportunity to get the full range of emotions out of the subject you are speaking to. “People just want to experience love”, “Why can’t everyone just be happy”, “I think everyone deserves just one person to care about”. saying this sort of thing reminds the person you're speaking to, about their own problems with object relations and how they seek to be cared for, and to care. I have frequently used the line “why can’t everyone in the world just love each other” either to see the odd tear and rolling up of the bottom lip, which is a great opportunity to hug someone, it also primes that emotion to be used later on when you get into some heavy hitting covert hypnosis. Why you should look people in the eyes and look at their lips. The lip eye triangle is a key way to make people instantly want to kiss you. If you look at people in the eyes, and hold your gaze for a brief second even whilst walking through a shopping mall you can constantly stop people straight in their tracks. It’s a combination of “Do I know him?”, “How do I know him?” or it’s the suddenly feeling of wanting to kiss you without them understanding why, because they are so used to this feeling from former relationships. Most single people, and/or people in relationships have lost that spark of a spontaneous ‘look’ that causes a kiss. Because the ‘look’ is used so infrequently then the emotions and reactions it entails are almost privately reversed and elicited just by pulling that expression. If you follow the advice about using proximity in bars/clubs whilst touching, then doing the lip eye triangle at the right time can often outright

cause a kiss even out of someone who really never had any intention of kissing you. Why you should believe that people are bored and want to change their lives. There are times when you can open up a space for people to play. Or you can use a line to make someone question what they are actually achieving by ‘going out all the time’ a lot of the girls you see in nightclubs have been single for so long they might have forgot the reason they are there. Help people rediscover their ability to make choices, and then leave it up to them what they are going to do with that newfound freedom of choice. By encouraging people to make choices, and do things they enjoy, prompts them to do things other than what they’ve done before, and therefore more likely to make the decision you later offer them. Scripts like; “You know when you go a party, and you just want to do something crazy special.” or, “ you know when your just Bored of the mundane, and you're just wanting to try something new?” tend to work mixed in with stories like the one mentioned above. Why you should assume every girl is just desperate for a new relationship. If you act like everyone’s looking for a relationship underneath it all, and hold that belief, then you can start discovering chinks in peoples armour; You can ask questions like “What’s it like being single? Do you ever miss being in a relationship, having that comfort?” Although this is a little strong, it should make the subject think about whether they do miss relationships - and even if they argue they don’t, at least they are now considering whether they would ever change their mind on that. The part of the brain is activated and ready to respond to ongoing changes

in the environment i.e. “whether she wants you.” There is one story in particularly that seems to work most of the time all by itself, it goes something like the following. “So the other day I was chatting to this girl, and she had just come out of a relationship. And all she was thinking about, was meeting someone, and taking them home… its like.. all the people who had been single for ages, were like, looking bored or acting like they were having fun,.. but their night had no structure, or plan. But she, she knew what she wanted, for everyone else the night ends at 2am, but for her that’s when the night begins”. And then I thought “fuck, all I do, is go out and hang out with my friends, like every time…. What’s the point in that”. Why you should isolate the target and speak to that one person you need to talk to. One way of getting the sneaky and managing to isolate someone is to first have them question whether they enjoy being surrounded by lots of people, one way to do this is to have them question if they on the whole feel “largely misunderstood” You should only ask questions that imply that others misunderstand them, after you have been able to fully dedicate your focus and energy to seeming as if you hear them and have the time for them. Then using a line such as “do you ever feel like people never really listen to you” that’s your opportunity to make them feel listened to, and want to be heard - and creates a good opening to allow you to - find a chance to lead the subject off by themselves after a few moments. Why you should be the happy center that makes everyone else feel great. It’s quite easy to make others around you really happy. Firstly you need to address all the reasons why they are so unique, and

make them feel really clever. And then you need to be the embodiment of all the things they lack in their life. So if they are a bit geeky, then your job is to be Mr Cool, this is a bit of an extreme example, but you surround yourself with girls and bring some girls into his group - and he will be happier than ever, as temporarily he is complete as a man rather than split off from his true form. Look for what people lack but need and offer them that as your identity. Then slowly make them feel as if they can have that quality too. (note: If your selling or persuading the moment the subject experiences the euphoria/peace as a result of becoming complete, that’s when you do the hard-selling, or heavy hitting hypnotic language or pushy close.) But as a whole you need to be there to bring people up, you need to be the epicenter of happiness and watch the venue flock to you for enthusiasm. Why you should demand payment the moment someone experiences the emotion. When you’ve captured someone’s attention and you know for sure what emotion they are experiencing in that moment, and it’s powerful, then you’ve got something to pace and lead you’ve temporarily fulfilled a gap in their life, and they are only going to experience the temporal pleasure from - not having that need anymore - temporarily they don’t have issues with object relations - suddenly the world isn’t separate from themselves it’s contained within themselves like it was when they were in the mothers womb. When I first became a pick up artist trainer, I was told - “Look Vince, the moment you get that leads name and email, you’ve got to email them, track down who they are, pop up on their chat, and find their number and call them - and have a discussion about their problem... if you do that you’ll make a sale and do the very thing they find impossible in their own

life.... lead by example Vince” it was great advice - people’s schemas become activated relevant, maybe you’ll only see that one activated once - open to accept new learnings - the pathways of the connectome have the energy and are creatively waiting to re-jig and then after twenty minutes or a day or two the connections will close, and that ‘special moment of activation’ will likely disappear for life, become subsided by others more prominent ideas, or just lose that ‘spark’ that it had on that day... because repeated thoughts lose their energy as the Gestaltian loop closes, you have a once in a lifetime opportunity every time you have an opportunity. Why you should, assume people ‘acting’ or pretending is the same as actually responding. Put it this way, if you go to a business meeting with someone, then you’ve probably got the deal closed, it’s just a matter of closing them. A salesman once told me that he would make clients a cup of coffee that was boiling hot in a thin paper cup so they couldn’t lift it to drink it in less than half an hour, that would give him half an hour to make assumptive closes. If you manage to get some alone time with people, and it ‘looks like’ the situation is escalating in a certain direction then the subject will end up feeling that way. Why you should stand in the center of the social circle. Center of the circle – by standing in the center of a circle you become more attractive. It was shown in a study of ‘The Weakest Link’ (Levitt: 2004) so if you are going to enter into a group, slowly start trying to bend the group around you, or at least stand in the middle of it where you can become the most seen, and available to speak to.

Why you should Dress differently. By dressing different to everyone else makes you stand out, but it shouldn’t be just different that anyone could achieve, it should be uniqueness and rarity that is hard to come by. By focusing on your character, your nature, what you want to portray as a kind of story... from this you can build up a sort of Brand Image that represents you, it says a story about you just through your ‘look’ if you want to actually do this properly get a really good image consultant, you're going to have to pay top dollar for a good one, honestly there is no point just using your friend down the street. You need someone who understands Graphic Art, Commercial Art, Fashion Advertising, and has real industry experience consulting for people who need image consultation to make profit. If you don’t want to get an image consultant then pick your favourite movie character, or your favourite celebrity think to yourself “What would he wear?” and copy him precisely, remember it’s got to be a look that can be unique to you, that fits in with you else it’s not a genuine competitive advantage. Why you should act weird and unusual. Acting different – being different to everyone else makes you stand out, but this doesn’t mean being weird or strange in the same sense that everyone else could just act like that, it should be for example a faraway accent, or a lifestyle attitude that is hard to come by. Being different makes you surprising, interesting - it ensures that people can’t ‘frame you’ based on the previous knowledge they have, instead it forces them to see you for what you are - and thus provides you an opportunity to teach them rules, responses, ideas in this newly created open space. (‘tabula rasa’)

Why you you make sure your regularly seen. Recognisability and frequency of - The more easily recognizable you are to the greatest number of people; the more easily people will be any to identify whether you have additional consumer surplus they can acquire from you available. People tend to enjoy the familiar, they find it comfortable, of course ‘you can’t change a first impression’ so before you become so familiar that your stuck with their impression of you - you should ensure that they have a good clear representation ‘brand image’ of who you are. Why you should be energetic. Be more energetic and alive than anyone, instead of using venues to get you excited, you be excited first, instead of ‘getting off’ on meeting people, ‘get off’ on people wanting to meet you. People are attracted to value, if you're creating energy then all the people who want more of that will seek you out, people are profit seekers and skimmers. The people that have energy will want to partner with you to maintain their market strength, and form a monopoly over ‘positive energy’ in the marketplace. Why you should not think about what you're saying, and instead should just say what you see. Say what you see - This is your opener, you need to state things you see about the world, don't be a thinking person but instead be a touchy feeling excitable person. Why you should be willing to get into a fight over it. Skin in the game – In business this means you’re truly invested in the success of your company, your life happiness fully depends on it, if it doesn’t work. You’re bankrupt. A lot of guys

go out and they think ‘I can’t stay out long, I’ve got work in the morning’. They never truly put everything they’ve got into attempting to become the top gun in the social situation. The winner takes nearly all the rewards, second place gets little. If you’re not doing everything you can to win, you won’t, it’s far too competitive, it’s by definition a perfectly competitive market. Why you should aim to go into an environment you can perfectly control, rather than competing in one where you have to work hard. Big fish small pond – by targeting your audience and demonstrating your unique traits to them you can more actively dominate that market than you can by going for a larger market. That means that by heavily controlling an easy to win situation will often produce infinitely greater benefits then focusing on winning a difficult situation. Just think of the oil companies OPEC, by acting big you can be choosey and control the power you acquire, if you dive into the deep end you fight amongst the rest struggling to get ahead. Fight the small guys, take what you can, win and get ahead. The player doesn’t make the venue, the venue makes the player – It’s about the relationship between you and your audience as a competitive strategy that places you in a position of power where bidders negotiate with you in order to acquire your value. That means girls will come to you and try to get you because you’re the best. (No one wants second best). Why you should share secrets with others. Telling of secrets – By admitting secrets about yourself (whether they are true or not) this inclines the listener to tell secrets about themselves, this causes them to feel greater feelings of liking towards you in order to protect their investment.

Why you should get people to commit. Build commitment – Guiding people, leading them, having them follow you, listen to you, be locked into you. Physically holding them and pacing and leading their words are all ways to get people involved in your movement. To be responsive to your priming, anchoring and suggestions.

Thanks for reading,

Vince Lynch

Bibliography (2001)Mindware: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Cognitive Science. Oxford University Press (Jokes from http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/lit_terms/puns.html: Date accessed – 04/01/2012) 2002, Vol. 6, No. 4, 304–315 A. Dijkersterhuis, P. K Smith, R. B van baaren and D. H. wigboldus (2005). 'The unconscious consumer effects of enviroment on consumer behaviour. A Beautiful Mind: The Shooting Script, Akiva Goldsman,( 2002) Aarts, H., Dijksterhuis, A., & Custers, R. (2003). Automatic normative behavior in environments: The moderating role of conformity in activating social norms. Social Cognition, 21, 447464. Aarts, H. And A Dijksterhuis (2003) 'the silence of the library: environment, situational norm, and social behaviour' Journal of personality and social psychology 84: 18-28. Achtenberg, D. (2002) Cognition of Value in Aristotle's Ethics: Promise of Enrichment, Threat of Destruction. SUNY Press Adam Smith (1776) The wealth of nations. W. Strahan and T. Cadell, London Adam Smith (1970), Wealth Of Nations, Vol 1, p. 26-27. Published by Penguin Books, London.

Alain A. Lewis (1985), 'On Effectively Computable Realizations of Choice Functions', Mathematical Social Sciences, 10 (1), August, 43-80 Alain A. Lewis (1985), 'The Minimum Degree of Recursively Representable Choice Functions', Mathematical Social Sciences, 10 (2), October, 179-88 Alfred Marshall. (1920) Principles of Economics. An introductory Volume. 8th edition. London: Macmillan. Allen W. Wood (1990) Hegel's Ethical Thought. Cambridge University Press Alumit Ishai (2010) Seeing with the mind’s eye: top-down, bottom-up, and conscious awareness. Published by: Biology Reports. Institute of Neuroradiology, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland Andy Clarke (2001) Reasons, Robots and the Extended Mind Article first published online: 17 DEC 2002 published by Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G. and D. Prelec, (2003) Coherent arbitrariness: Stable demand curves without stable preferences, Quarterly Journal of Economics 118, 73-105. Ariely., D. George Loewenstein and Drazen Prelec; (2003) 'Coherent Arbitariness: Stable Demand Curves Without Stable Preferences.' The Quarterly Journal of Economics 118, 73-105 Ariely., D et al; (2003) Buying, bidding, playing, or competing? Value assessment and decision dynamics in online auctions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, Lawrence Erthaum Associates, Inc.

Arnheim, Rudolf; (1977) The Dynamics of Architectural Form; Date Accessed 13/11/2012 http://www.fenom.com/theory/theory165.pdf Arthur Koestler. (1964) The Act of Creation. Hutchinson Arthur Schopenhauer. (2012) The Art of Controversy. Published: Adelaide. Edu. B. Major and R. Heslin (1982). perceptions of cross-sex and samesex nonreciprocal touch: it is better to give than receive'. Journal of non-verbal behaviour, 6, pages 148-62. Bandler, Grinder (1981) Trance-Formations: Neuro-Linguistic Programming and the Structure of Hypnosis Real People Press; Fifth Printing. Edition Bandler, Richard & John Grinder (1975a). The Structure of Magic I: A Book About Language and Therapy. Palo Alto, CA: Science & Behavior Books. Bandler, Richard & John Grinder (1975b). The Structure of Magic II: A Book About Communication and Change. Palo Alto, CA: Science & Behavior Books.. Barnier, A. J., Nash, M. R. (2008). Introduction: a roadmap for explanation, a working definition. In M. R. Nash & A. J. Barnier (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Hypnosis: Theory, Research and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Barnier, A. M., McConkey, K. M. (2004). Defining and identifying the highly hypnotizable person. In: M. Heap, R. J. Brown, D. A. Oakley (Eds.), The Highly Hypnotizable Person. New York: Brunner-Routledge.

Bechara A, Damasio H, Damasio AR (2003) Role of the amygdala in decision-making. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 985:356–69. Berscheid, E. Walster, E., (1974) Physical Attractiveness. In L. Berkowitz (ed., ) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Vol. 7, 1974. Exerpts Berscheid. Walster. (1972) What is beautiful is good. J. Personal. Soc. Psvchol. 24:285-90. Biancoli (1989) V. Publication of the International Erich Fromm Society. Date Accessed (01/11/2011) http://www.erichfromm.de/data/pdf/Biancoli,%20R.,%201989b.pdf Biancoli, R. (1989) Psychology in Marx According to Fromm. V. Publication of the International Erich Fromm Society. Date Accessed (01/11/2011) http://www.erichfromm.de/data/pdf/Biancoli,%20R.,%201989b.pdf Blau, P. (1964) Exchange & Power in Social Life. Transaction Publishers, Blunden, A. Baggins, B. Ryan, S. Walters, D. Batur, Sertan. Nehru, A. Bismo, M. (1999-2008) Glossary, Published: Marxists Internet Archive (marxists.org) Bogdashina (2002) 'Gestalt Perception' in Autism: Superability or Deficit?. Stored on; accessed 1/11/2011 http://www.nwlahub.co.uk/asc/documents/dec09/Gestalt%20Per ception.doc Bolden, L. Bowman, M. Kaufman, S. Lindemann, D. (2003) The Marx-Engels Reader. Web Access (13/11/2012)

http://www.nyu.edu/classes/jackson/calhoun.jackson.theory/pap ers/A--MarxGeneral.pdf Published: NYU Botvinick, Carter, Barch, Cohen (2001) Conflict Monitoring and Cognitive Control. Psychological Review, 2001, vol 108, No. 3, 624-652 Braffman, Kirsch, (1999) Imaginative Suggestibility and Hypnotizability: An Empirical Analysis*1 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Volume 77, Issue 3, September 1999, Pages 578-587 Brehm (1956) Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 3849 Brewer, M., Hewstone, M (2004) Self and Social Identity. Indianapolis: John Wiley & Sons Brock, T. Green, M (2005) Persuasion: Psychological Insights and Perspectives. SAGE Publishing Burger, J. M. (1999). The foot-in-the-door compliance procedure: A multiple-process analysis and review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 303-325 Burger, Soroka, Gonzago, Murphy, Somervell (2001) The Effect of Fleeting Attraction on Compliance to Requests. PSPB, Vol. 27 No. 12, December 2001 1578-1586 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc Burkeman, O. (2011) Daniel Kahneman: 'We're beautiful devices'. Published: The Guardian Newspaper, UK

Burns, K.Bechara, A. (2007) Decision making and free will: a neuroscience perspective. Behav. Sci. Law, 25: 263–280 Buss, D. (1989) Sex Differences in Human Mate preferences: Evolutionary hypothesis tested in 37 Cultures. Department of Psychology, University of Michigan Bu¨chel, C., Dolan, R. J., Armony, J. L., & Friston, K. J. (1999). Amygdala–hippocampal involvement in human aversive trace conditioning revealed through event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Neuroscience, 19, 10869 –10876. C. Hendrick and S. S Hendrick (1986) 'A theory and method of love' Journal of personality and social psychology. 30 pages 392402 CAMERER,C. Loewenstein, G. Prelec, D. (2005)Neuroeconomics: How Neuroscience Can Inform Economics. Journal of Economic Literature Vol. XLIII (March 2005), pp. 9–64 Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105. Care ([1]:180) Reference not found. Carel, H (2006) Moral and Epistemic Ambiguity in Oedipus Rex. Summer/Fall Open. Issue 9.1 Web Accessed (13/11/2012) http://www.janushead.org/9-1/Carel.pdf Carver, C. Scheier, M. (2002) Control Processes and SelfOrganization as Complementary Principles Underlying Behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review

Cattell, R. B., & Nesselroade, J. R. ( 1967 ). "'Likeness'" and "completeness '" theories examined by 16 personality factor measures on stably and unstably married couples (Advanced Publication No. 7 ). Champaign: Laboratory of Personality and Group Analysis, University of Illinois. Charles A Pierce, Donn Byrne, Herman Aguinis (1996) Attraction in organisations: a model of workplace romance. Published by the Journal of organisational Behaviour, Vol 17. 532. Chomsky, N. (1987) Language and Problems of Knowledge. The MIT Press Cialdini, R. (2007) Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. 1st Collins Business Essentials Ed edition HarperBusiness; Rev. Ed., Cialdini, R. B., L. J. Demaine, B. J Sagarin, D. W Barrett, K. Rhoads and P. L Winter (2006) ' managing social norms for persuasive impact', Social Influence, 1: 3-15. Clark, M.S. & Reis, H.T. (1988) `Interpersonal Processes in Close Relationships', Annual Review of Psychology 39: 609-672. Collins,R. (2005) Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton, EDU. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Csikszentmihalyi, I.(1992) Optimal Experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness. Cambridge University Press Czerniawski, D & Maloney, M. W (1999), Creating Brand Loyalty, The management of power positioning and really great advertising, Hudson House Illinios.

D. L. summerhayes and R. W. suchner (1978). 'Power implications of touch in male-female relationships'. Sex roles, 4, pages 103-10 Damasio H (1995) Human brain anatomy in computerized images. New York: Oxford University Press. Daniel Dennett: (1991) Real Patterns. The Journal of Philosophy. Vol. 88, No. 1 (Jan., 1991), pp. 27-51  (article consists of 25 pages) Published by: Journal of Philosophy, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2027085 Daniel G. Freedman (1979) Human Sociobiology : A Holistic Approach, Free Press Date Accessed (13/11/2012) http://www.investorwords.com/2725/law_of_one_price.html Davatzikos, Ruparel, Fan, Shen, Acharyya, Loughead, Gur, Langleben(2005). Classifying spatial patterns of brain activity with machine learning methods: application to lie detection. NeuroImage 2005;28:663-668. David M. Buss (1988) The Evolution of Human Intrasexual Competition: Tactics of Mate Attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1988, Vol. J4, No.4,616-628 Davis, M. Marslen-Wilson, W. Gaskell, G. (1997) Ambiguity and Competition in Lexical Segmentation. Web Accessed 13/11/2012 http://www.mrccbu.cam.ac.uk/people/matt.davis/pubs/davis.cogsci97.pdf Dawkins, R (1976) The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press

Dawkins, R (1986) The Blind Watchmaker. Norton & Company, Inc DeBruine (2004) Facial Resemblance increases the attractiveness of same-sex faces more than other -sex faces. Published by The Royal Society. DePaulo, Miller (2004) The Many Faces of Lies. The Social Psychology of Good and Evil. New York: Guilford Press. Decety (1995) Do imagined and executed actions share the same neural substrate?. Cognitive Brain Research 3 (1996) 87-93, published by 1NSERM, France Dennett, D.(1991) Consciousness Explained. Little, Brown and Co. Descartes, R. Descartes (1996) Meditations on First Philosophy: With Selections from the Objections and Replies. Revised Edition. Cambridge University Press Devadas(1982) The Moon Illusion. Astronomical Society of India BULLETIN Vol. 10, No. 1, 16-17, Dienes, Brown, Hutton, Kirsch, Mazzoni (2009) Hypnotic suggestibility, cognitive inhibition, and dissociation. Consciousness and Cognition 18 (2009) 837–847 Dienes, Z. Perner, J.(2006) Executive control without conscious awareness: the cold control theory of hypnosis. University of Sussex Dijksterhuis, A., & Aarts, H. (2003). On wildebeests and humans: The preferential detection of negative stimuli. Psychological Science, 14, 14-18.

Dillard, J. (1990). Self-inference and the foot-in-the-door technique: Quantity of behavior and attitudinal mediation. Human Communication Research, 16, 422-447 Dillard, James. Pfau, M. (2002) The Persuasion Handbook: Developments in Theory and Practice, 1st Edition. Sage Publications, Inc; Dilts, R. DeLozier, J. (2000) Encylopedia Of Systemic NLP and NLP New Coding. NLP University Press Dixon, Brunet, Laurence (1990). Hypnotizability and automaticity: Toward a parallel distributed processing model of hypnotic responding. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 99, 336– 343. Dixon, M., & Laurence, J.-R. (1992). Hypnotic susceptibility and verbal automaticity: Automatic and strategic processing differences Don Diebel (1991) Complete Guide to Meeting Women. Gemini Pub Co Donnersmarck,F. McQuarrie,C. Fellowes, J. (2010) The Tourist (film) Douglas Walton, "The straw man fallacy". In Logic and Argumentation, ed. Johan van Bentham, Frans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst and Frank Veltman. Amsterdam, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, North-Holland, 1996. pp. 115-128 Dutton,. K (2010, p204) Flipnosis. Cornerstone Digital

E. Hatfield, G W. Walster, J. Pilivavin and L. Schmidt (1973) 'playing hard to get: understanding an elusive phenomenon'. Journal of personality and social psychology, 26, pages 113-21 E. Jones and E. Gordon (1972) 'Timing of self disclosure and its effects on personal attraction'. Journal of personality and social psychology, 24, pages 358-65 EPSTEIN J M & Axtell R L (1996) Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up. The MIT Press. Eastwick, Finkel,Mochon, Ariely (2007) 'selective verus unselective romantic desire: not all reciprocity is created equal'. Psychological science, 18, pages 317-19. Eberhard, M.(1975) The Evolution of Social Behavior by Kin Selection. The University of Chicago Press Eckhard Hess (1973) Imprinting and the Tell-Tale Eye. 1St Edition Van Nostrand Reinhold Co Eckland, B. ( 1968 ). Theories of mate selection. Social Biology, 15, 71 - 84. Eddy, N. (2011)Is Neuroscience the Death of Free Will? The Opionator pages, New York Times. Edmund Burke (1757) A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful. Edward O. Wilson (1975) Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Ekman (2009) Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics, and Marriage, Third Edition. W. W. Norton & Company; Revised Edition edition (January 26, 2009)

Epstein and Axtell: (1996) Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up. Mitpress Copublished with the Brookings Institution. Eric Beinhocker (2007) The Origin Of Wealth: Evolution, Complexity, and the Radical Remaking of Economics. Random House Business Eric Hollander, Jennifer Bartz, William Chaplin, Ann Phillips, Jennifer Sumner, Latha Soorya, Evdokia Anagnostou, and Stacey Wasserman, (2007) Oxytocin Increases Retention of Social Cognition in Autism, http://autism.bibliomaker.ch/BM_DIRECTORY/H/BM000001785/ 7785/HOL3.pdf Erich Fromm (2001:14) The fear of freedom. Routledge Ericsson, Anders K.; Kintsch, W. (1995). "Long-term working memory". Psychological Review 102 (2): 211–245 Fate,J. Reil, S. (2003) Make Every Girl Want You: Everything from Picking-Up Girls to Having a Successful Relationship. Ajackal Publishing Federmeier, K. Kutas, M. (1999) A Rose by Any Other Name: Long-Term Memory Structure and Sentence Processing. Journal of Memory and Language 41, 469–495 (1999) Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J.M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58(2), 203–210. Fishbein, Ajzen (1975) Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Published by AddisonWesley Pub. Co.  (Reading, Mass.)

Fiske, S.T., & Taylor, S.E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Fitzsimons, Chartrand, Fitzsimons (2008) Automatic Effects of Brand Exposure on Motivated Behavior: How Apple Makes You “Think Different”. Journal of Consumer Research, Inc. " Vol. 35 " Fitzsimons, Gráinne M., Tanya L. Chartrand and Gavan J. Fitzsimons (2008) “Automatic Effects of Brand Exposure on Motivated Behavior: How Apple Makes You “Think Different”,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35(1), 21-35. Francesco Mele. (2002) Real and Fictional Ridicule A Cognitive Approach for Models of Humour Frank,Menasco,O’Sullivan. (2008)Human behavior and deception detection. Handbook of Science and Technology for Homeland Security, Vol. 5, Edited by John G. Voeller Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C., (1966) Compliance Without Pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique, JPSP, 4, 196-202 Freedman, J. L and S. C Fraser (1966) SELECTIVE EXPOSURE TO INFORMATION: A CRITICAL REVIEW*Published by  Public Opinion Quarterly Freud, S. (1905) Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality. Oxford, England: Imago Publ. Co. Frith, C. D. (1992) The cognitive neuropsychology of Schizophrenia, Erlbaum, Hove, UK Fritz Pearls,(1973) The gestalt approach & Eye witness to therapy, published by Ben Lomond, Calif.,] Science & Behavior Books

Fromm, E (1956:9) the art of loving. Harper & Row Fromm, E. (1939b) Selfishness and Self-Love. Published: Web Accessed (11/11/2011) V. Publication of the International Erich Fromm Society.. http://www.erich-fromm.de/data/pdf/1939be.pdf Fromm, E. (1942) Fear of Freedom Routledge. Web Access (13/11/2012) http://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1942/character.h tm Fromm, E. (1976) To Have or to Be? London: Continuum International Publishing Group Fromm, E. (1982) The courage to be human. Continuum Intl Pub Group Fromm, E. (1990). Man for Himself: An Inquiry Into the Psychology of Ethics. Holt Paperbacks Fromm, E. (2006) The Art of Loving. 15 Ed. Harper Perennial Modern Classics. Garner, R. (2005) Post-it Note Persuasion: A Sticky Influence. Journal of Consumer Psychology Godin, S. (2003) Purple Cow: Transform Your Business by Being Remarkable. Portfolio Hardcover; New edition Goffman, E. (1961) Encounters: Two Studies in the Sociology of Interaction – Fun in Games & Role Distance. Indianapolis, Bobbs-Merrill. Goldsman, A. Nasar, S. (2001) A beautiful mind. (film)

Goldwater (1972) Psychological Significance of Pupillary Movements. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 77, No. 5, 340-355 Gollwitzer (1999) Implementation Intentions: Strong Effects of Simple Plans. American Psychological Association, Inc. Vol. 54. No. 7, 493-503 Gollwitzer, (1993) Goal Achievement and the role of intentions. European Review Of Social Psychology, Vol 4. Published John Wiley & Sons Ltd. date accessed: 28/12/2010 http://www.psych.nyu.edu/gollwitzer/93_Gollwitzer_Goal_Achi evement_neu1.pdf Gollwitzer, P. M., & Moskowitz, G. B.(1996). Goal effects on action and cognition. In E. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 361-399). New York: Guilford Press. Gollwitzer, Sheeran (1999) Implementation Intentions: Strong Effects of Simple Plans. Web Accessed 20/11/2012 http://dccps.cancer.gov/brp/constructs/implementation_intentio ns/goal_intent_attain.pdf Green, Brock. (2005) Persuasiveness of narratives. In T. C. Brock & M. C. Green (Eds.) Persuasion: Psychological insights and perspectives (Second Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc. pp. 117-142. Green, M.C., & Brock, T.C. (2005) Persuasiveness of narratives. In T. C. Brock & M. C. Green (Eds.) Persuasion: Psychological insights and perspectives (Second Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc. pp. 117-142. Greenberg, J. Mitchell, S. (1983:11) Object relations in psychoanalytic theory. Harvard University Press

Greene, R.(2004)Art of Seduction. Profile Books Gueguen (2007) 'the effect of a man's touch on womans compliance to a request in a courtship context' social influence, 2, pages 81-97. Gueguen, N. (2007) Bust Size and hitchhiking: A field study. Perceptual and motor skills. 105 1294-1298 Guertin WH, Wilhelm PL (1954). A statistical analysis of the electrodermal response employed in lie detection. J Gen Psychol. ;51:153–160. Gulledge, A (2004) The Art of Persuasion: A Practical Guide to Improving Your Convincing Power. 1st Ed. California: iUniverse, Inc Harris, R. J., & Monaco, G. E. (1978). Psychology of pragmatic implication: Information processing between the lines. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 107, 1–22 Hatfield, E. Rapson, R. (1988) Gender Differences in Love and Intimacy: The Fantasy vs. the Reality Heinke, Humphreys(2003). Attention, spatial representation and visual neglect: Simulating emergent attention and spatial memory in the Selective Attention for Identification Model (SAIM). Psychological Review, 110(1):29-87Published by Accessed on 20/11/2012 http://www.comppsych.bham.ac.uk/publications/psychreview.pdf Henri Tajfel (2010) Social Identity and Intergroup Relations. Cambridge University Press

Herbert Simon (Dec, 2003) Published by American Economic Review, Vol 93, No. 5 cited in, Daniel Kahneman (Dec., 2003) Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics The American Economic Review Vol. 93, No. 5 (Dec., 2003), pp. 1449-1475  (article consists of 27 pages) Published by: American Economic Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3132137 Higgins, Judge (2004) The Effect of Applicant Influence Tactics on Recruiter Perceptions of Fit and Hiring Recommendations: A Field Study. Journal of Applied Psychology by the American Psychological Association. Vol. 89, No. 4, 622–632 Hilgard, E. R. (1978/1979). The Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scales as related to other measures of hypnotic responsiveness. The American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 21, 68-83 Horner, T. (1985) The Psychic Life of the young infant. Children's Psychiatric Hospital, University of Michigan,. Web Accessed (13/11/2012) Horner, T. (1985) The Psychic Life of the young infant. Children's Psychiatric Hospital, University of Michigan,. Web Accessed (13/11/2012) http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73929/1/j.19390025.1985.tb03448.x.pdf Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L. and Kelley, H. H. (1953) Communications and persuasion: Psychological studies in opinion change, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press Howlin, P. (1986). An overview of social behaviour in autism. Schopler, E. & Mesibov, G. B. (Eds.) New York: Plenum.

Hull, C. (1933). Hypnosis and Suggestability: An Experimental Approach. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts [see discussion of this work at http://www.hypnotism.org/Research.htm]. Hull, C. (1943). Principles of Behavior. New York: AppletonCentury-Crofts. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) Idea for a Universal History from a Cosmopolitan Point of View. (1784). Translation by Lewis White Beck. From Immanuel Kant, “On History,” The Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1963 Jamieson, D. W. , & Zanna, M. P. (1989). Need for structure in attitude formation and expression. In A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler, & A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), ... Jecker, J. and Landy, D. (1969). Likin a person as function of doing him a favor. Human Relations, 22, 371-378 John R. Searle (1983) Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. First Ed. Cambridge University Press John Skowronski (1998)' spontaneous trait transference: communicators take on the qualities they describe in others. Journal of personality and social psychology. 74, pages 837-48 Johnson, M.K. (1983). A multiple-entry, modular memory system. In G.H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research. and theory (Vol. 17, pp. 81123). New York: Academic Press Johnson, S. Jackson, R. Maslin, K. Woodfin, F. (2005) Understanding philosophy: for A2 level AQA. Nelson Thornes Limited

Jonah Lehrer (2010) How We Decide. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Jordan, R W. (2009) Bard college. Annandale on Hudson. NY. [email protected]. Web Accessed (13/11/2012) http://www.bard.edu/bluecher/lectures/socrates/socrates_page5. htm Joseph LeDoux (2003) The Emotional Brain, Fear, and the Amygdala. Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology, Vol. 23, Nos. 4/5 Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. 1 edition. Farrar, Straus and Giroux; Kara D. Federmeier (1999) A Rose by Any Other Name: LongTerm Memory Structure and Sentence Processing Karim, Schneider, Lotze, Veit, Sauseng, Braun, Birbaumer (2010) The Truth about Lying: Inhibition of the Anterior Prefrontal Cortex Improves Deceptive Behavior. Cerebral Cortex January 2010;20:205--213 Karl Marx, John Locke, Lawrence Hugh Simon, Kenneth Winkler (1994) Karl Marx: Selected Writings. Hackett Publishing Kassin, Appleby, Perillo (2009) Interviewing suspects: Practice, science, and future directions. The British Psychological Society Kawakami, K., Dovidio, J.F., & Dijksterhuis A. (2003). The effect of social category priming on specific attitudes: A clear and present danger. Psychological Science, 14, 315-319.

Kehr, H. M. (2003). Goal conflicts, attainment of new goals, and well being among managers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8, 195–208. Kies, D (1995) Document URL: http://papyr.com/hypertextbooks/comp1/logic.htm Last revision: 10/01/2012 02:31:14 Kirsch, I., & Braffman, W. (1999). Correlates of hypnotizability: The first empirical study. Contemporary Hypnosis, 16, 224-230. Kirsch, I., & Braffman, W. (2001). Imaginative suggestibility and hypnotizability. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, pp. 57-61. Kruglanski, A., W and Thompson. E.P. (1999). Persuasion by Single Route: A view from the Unimodel. Psychology Inquiry. 10 (2), 83-109 LaBar, K. S., LeDoux, J. E., Spencer, D. D., & Phelps, E. A. (1995). Impaired fear conditioning following unilateral temporal lobectomy in humans. Journal of Neuroscience, 15, 6846 – 6855. Langer (1989) Mindfulness. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Langer E., A Blank and B Chanowitz (1978) “The mindlessness of ostensibly thoughtful action: the role of “placebic” information in interpersonal interaction”, journal of personality and social psychology, 36: 639-42. Langford, P. (1995) Approaches to the Development of Moral Reasoning. Oxon: Psychology Press Larson (2009) Persuasion: Reception and Responsibility. 12th edition, published by Cengage Learning

Layton, Julia. (2006). "How Police Interrogation Works" 18 May 2006. HowStuffWorks.com. 20 November 2012. LeDoux, J. (2000) EMOTION CIRCUITS IN THE BRAIN. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2000. 23:155–184 Leil Lowndes(1997)How to Make Anyone Fall in Love with You. 1 edition. McGraw-Hill; Leon Festinger: (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press Leontev, A. (1978) Activity, Consciousness, and Personality. Published: Marxists.org. Date Accessed (13/11/2012) http://www.marxists.org/archive/leontev/works/1978/index.htm Leslie Dixon, Alan Glynn (2011) Limitless. Lewis, A. A. (1985) On effectively computable realizations of choice functions. Mathematical social sciences 10:43-80 Libet, B. (1985). Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8:529-566. Linda, M (1981) Contingency Change Analysis of the Disruption and Recovery of Social Exchange and Cooperation.. // Social Forces; Mar81, Vol. 59 Issue 3, p729 Lindstrom, M & Seybold, P. B. (2003) Brand Child: Remarkable Insights into the Minds of Today’s Global Kids & their Relationships with Brands, Kogan Page Ltd, UK & USA.

Lindstrom, M. and Seybold, P. B. (2003).Brandchild: remarkable insights into the minds of today’s global kids and their relationships with brands. London: Kogan Page. M Porter: (1985) Competitive Advantage, published by free press, new york. March, Heath (1994) A primer on decision making. Published by Free Press Marianne Williamson (1992) A Return to Love: Reflections on the Principles of A Course in Miracles. HarperCollins Marx, C. (1863-1878) Progress Publishers, Moscow 1956, translated by I. Lasker;Transcribed for the Internet: by proletarian revolutionaries in the Philippines; Web Accessed 13/11/2012 http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885c2/index.htm Max Velmans (2008) PRECONSCIOUS FREE WILL. Date Accessed (11/10/2012) McConkey (1986:314) Opinions about hypnosis and selfhypnosis before and after hypnotic testing. Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 1986 Oct;34(4):311-9.  McGuire, W. J. (1968). Personality and attitude change: An information processing theory. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, and T. M. Ostrom (eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 171-196). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Meston, Frohlich (2003) Love at First Fright: Partner Salience Moderates Roller-Coaster-Induced Excitation Transfer. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 32, No. 6, December 2003, pp. 537–544 (C

Michael J. Apter (1982) The experience of motivation: the theory of psychological reversals. London ; New York : Academic Press, 1982. Michael R. Finn (2009) Hysteria, hypnotism, the spirits, and pornography: fin-de-siècle cultural .Published by University of Delaware Press Mill, J. (1843) Robson, J. M., ed. (1963–1991), Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Mill, S (2005) On Liberty. Cosimo Classics Modahl, Green, Fein, Morris, Waterhouse, Feinstein, Levin (1989)Plasma Oxytocin Levels in Autistic Children. Society' of Biological Psychiatry; 43:270-277 Mook, D. G. (1987) Motivation: The Organization in ActionW.W. Norton and Company: New York, p. 10. Morrin, Maureen and S. Ratneshwar (2000), "The Impact of Ambient Scent on Evaluation, Attention and Memory for Familiar and Unfamiliar Brands," Journal of Business Research, 49 (2), 157-165. Mystery (2010) The Pickup Artist: The New and Improved Art of Seduction. Publisher: Villard Mystery. Odom, C. Strauss, N. (2007) The Mystery Method: How to Get Beautiful Women Into Bed. St. 1st Ed. Martin's Press Nardi (1984), TOWARD A SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY OF ENTERTAINMENT MAGIC (CONJURING). Symbolic Interaction, 7: 25–42. doi: 10.1525/si.1984.7.1.25

Nardi(1984)Toward a Social Psychology of Entertainment Magic (Conjuring) Journals for the university of California press. http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1525/si.1984.7.1.25 Neil Strauss (2005) The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pick-up Artists. New York Times Bestseller List Neil Strauss: (2005:67) The Game. Published by Canongate books Ltd. Nietzsche, F. Kaufmann, W. , Gay, P. (2000) Basic Writings of Nietzsche. 1st Ed. New York The Modern Library. Noam Chomsky (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press. Olson, Marshuetz (2005) Facial Attractiveness Is Appraised in a Glance. Published by American Psychological Association 2005, Vol. 5, No. 4, 498 –502 Olson, Marshuetz (2005) Facial Attractiveness Is Appraised in a Glance. by the American Psychological Association, Vol. 5, No. 4, 498 –502 Omark, Strayer,Freedman (1980) Dominance relations: An ethological view of human conflict and social interaction. New York. Garland STPM Press. Ormond McGill (1996)The New Encyclopedia of Stage Hypnotism. 1 edition. Crown House Publishing; P, Jehiely, (2003) Bounded rationality and imperfect learning. yCERAS, Paris and UCL, London. mailing address: C.E.R.A.S.E.N.P.C., C.N.R.S. (URA 2036), 48 Bd Jourdan, 75014 Paris, France; e-mail: [email protected]. (date accessed 28/12/2010:

http://74.125.155.132/scholar?q=cache:Cb8S5mjSGJ4J:scholar.goo gle.com/+P,+Jehiely&hl=en&as_sdt=2000 P, Jehiely; (2003) Bounded rationality and imperfect information. Game Theory vs AI. Bounded rationality and imperfect information. Game Theory vs AI. Palahniuk, C.Uhls, J. (1999) Fight Club Pekrun, Reinhard; Elliot, Andrew J.; Maier, Markus A. (2006) Achievement goals and discrete achievement emotions: A theoretical model and prospective test.Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol 98(3), Aug 2006, 583-597 Perls, F. Hefferline, R. Goodman, P. (1977) Gestalt Therapy: Excitement and Growth in the Human Personality. The Gestalt Journal Press Peter Carruthers (2010) The roots of scientific reasoning: infancy, modularity and the art of tracking http://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/1903/4350/1/Roots-ofscience.htm date accessed: 28/12/2010 Philippe Jehiel. (2003) Bounded Rationality and Imperfect Learning: Game Theory vs AI. Date Accessed 13/11/2012 http://www.enpc.fr/ceras/jehiel/AIGT.pdf Pierce, C. Byrne, D. Aguinis, H. (1998) Attraction in organizations: A model of workplace romance.Journal of Organizational Behavior Volume 17, Issue 1, pages 5–32, January 1996 Pinker, S. (1997). How the Mind Works. , New York: W. W. Norton & Company

Plato (360 B.C.E ). The Republic VII. Web Accessed (13/11/2013) http://classics.mit.edu/Plato Porter, M.E. (1985) Competitive Advantage , Free Press, New York, 1985. Potter, S. (1997) One-Upmanship. Moyer Bell and its subsidiaries Raghubi, Valenzuela (2006) 'Center-of-inattention: position biases in decision making'. Organisational Behaviour and human decision processes, 99, pages 66-80 Rand, A (1984) Philosophy: Who Needs It. 1st Ed. New York: Signet Books Rand, A. (1971) The Objectivist. New York. September Edition Rand, A.Mayhew, R. Berliner, M. Bernstein, A. Binswanger, H. Boeckmann, T. Britting, J. Ghate, D. Ghate, O. Gotthelf A. (2009) Essays on Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Lexington Books Rand, A. Smith, T. (2007) Ayn Rands Normative Ethics: The Virtuous Egoist. 1 edition; Cambridge University Press. Regan, P. (2003). The mating game: A primer on love, sex, and marriage. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Regan, P. C. (2008). The mating game: A primer on love, sex, and marriage (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Regan, P. C., & Berscheid, E. (1999). Lust: What we know about human sexual desire. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Regier, W. (2007:8) Web Accessed 13/11/2012. http://www.nebraskapress.unl.edu/supplements/Excerpts/Fall% 2007/9780803239692_excerpt.pdf

Rezso Balint 1907 (translated in Husain and Stein 1988, page 91) Rhodes (2006) The Evolutionary Psychology Of Facial Beauty. Annual. Review. Psycholology. 2006. 57:199–226 Ricardo, D. (1817) On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. London: John Murray Richard Dawkins (2006) The Selfish Gene by Oxford University Press Robinson, R. (1953) Plato's Earlier Dialectic. 2nd edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press Rochefoucauld, F. (1963) The Maxims of La Rochefoucauld. Date Accessed 13/11/2012 http://cuip.uchicago.edu/~ldernbach/msw/xhmaxims.pdf Rod A. Martin (2006) The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach Rudnytsky, P. (1987) Freud and Oedipus. New York: Columbia University Press. Rusbult, C. E., & Buunk, B. P. (1993). Commitment processes in close relationships: An interdependence analysis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 175-204 Rusbult, C. E., Onizuka, R. K., & Lipkus, I. (1993). What do we really want?: Mental models of ideal romantic involvement explored through multidimensional scaling. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 493-527 S. Jones (1965) 'effects of fear and specificity of recommendation upon attitudes and behaviour' Journal of personality and social psychology, )

Sanchirico, C. (2006) Detection Avoidance. New York University Law Review Scheibe, K. (1970) Beliefs and values (The Person in psychology series) 1st Printing edition. Holt, Rinehart and Winston; Schmitt,D. Buss, D.(1996) Strategic Self-Promotion and Competitor Derogation: Sex and Context Effects on the Perceived Effectiveness of Mate Attraction Tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996, Vol. 70. No. 6. 11851204 Schneider, W. & R. M. Shiffrin. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: 1. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, pp1-66. Schroeder (1976) 'Increasing compliance by legitimizing paltry contributions: when even a penny helps' Journal of personality and Social psychology, 34: 599-604 Seddon, F. (2008)Plato, Aristotle, Rand, and sexuality. The Journal of Ayn Rand. Studies 10, no. 1 (Fall): 207–17. Segal, Charles (ed.). 1983. Greek Tragedy. New York: Harper & Row 1993. Oedipus Tyrannus. New York: Twayne Publishers Seth Godin, (2003) In Praise of the Purple Cow http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/67/purplecow.html Date accessed: 24/12/2010 Seth Godin, (2008) Tribes: We Need You to Lead Us. Portfolio Hardcover; 1 edition Sheldon, Elliot (1999) Goal Striving, Need Satisfaction, and Longitudinal Well-Being: The Self-Concordance Model. Journal

of personality and social psychology. JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY. Published by APA American psychological society. Shiv, B., Loewenstein, G. Bechara, A. Damasio, H. et al (2009) Investment Behavior and the Negative Side of Emotion. Stanford University. Carnegie Mellon University, and University of Iowa Silberman, I. (2005b). Religion as a meaning-system: Implications for the new millennium. Journal of Social Issues.* Silberman, I. (2005c). Religious violence,terrorism and peace: A meaning system analysis. In R. F. Paloutzian and C. L. Park (Eds.). Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality. New York: The Guilford Press.* Silberman, I. (Ed.). (2005a). Religion as a meaning-system [Special issue]. Journal of Social Issues, 61 (4).* Silberman, I., Higgins, E. T., & Dweck, C. S. (2005). Religion and world change: Violence and terrorism versus peace. Journal of Social Issues.* Silberman, I. Higgins, E. T. & Dweck, C. S.(2001). Religion and well-being: World beliefs as mediators. Paper presented at the 109th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, California Simon, H. (1978) Rationality as a product of thought. Richard Ely Lecture. Date Accessed (13/11/2012) by The American Economic Review Vol. 68, No. 2, Papers and Proceedings of the Ninetieth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association (May, 1978), pp. 1-16  http://business.illinois.edu/josephm/BA504_Fall%202008/Session %208/Simon%20(1978).pdf

Smith, K (2011) Neuroscience vs philosophy: Taking aim at free will. Published online. Nature.com, International weekly Journal of science 31 August 2011 Sophocles (429 BCE) Oedipus the King . Web Accessed (13/11/2012) http://classics.mit.edu/Sophocles/oedipus.html Sophocles. Meyer, M. (2005) "Oedipus the King." Meyer, M. THE BEDFORD INTRODUCTION TO LITERATURE. Seventh. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, Stephen Hawking (1989) A Brief History of Time. 1st Edition. Bantam Steven pinker; (1997), Words and rules in the human brain Nature 387, 547-548(5 June 1997) Strack, F. & Deutsch, R. (2002). Urteilsheuristiken. In: Frey, d. & Irle, M.: Theorien der Sozialpsychologie Band III: Motivations-, Selbst- und Informationsverarbeitungstheorien (2. Aufl.) Bern: Verlag Hans Huber Strack, F. Deutsch, R. (2004) Reflective and Impulsive Determinants of Social Behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, 220–247 Susan T. Fiske (2009) Social Beings: Core Motives in Social Psychology. Wiley; 2 edition THAGARD (2006) TESTIMONY, CREDIBILITY, AND EXPLANATORY COHERENCE. Erkenntnis (2005) 63:295–316 The Sceptics Guide (2012) http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logicalfallacies.aspx

Tommasi,M. Ierulli, K. Becker, G. (1995) The New Economics of Human Behaviour. Cambridge University Press Triplett, (1990) The Solow Productivity Paradox: What do Computers do to Productivity?The Canadian Journal of Economics / Revue canadienne d'Economique Vol. 32, No. 2, Special Issue on Service Sector Productivity and the Productivity Paradox (Apr., 1999), pp. 309-334  Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the Canadian Economics Association Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D. & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell. Van Baaren, R. B., Holland, R. W., Steenaert, B., & van Knippenberg, A. (2003). Mimicry for money: Behavioral consequences of imitation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 393-398 Van Baaren, R. B., Maddux, W. W., Chartrand, T. L., De Bouter, C., & Van Knippenberg, A. (2003). It takes two to mimic: Behavioral consequences of self-construals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 84, 1093-1102 Volk, Quinsey (2002) The Influence of infant Facial Cues on Adoption Preferences. Walter de Gruyter, Inc., New York Human Nature, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 437–455. Vrij, Aldert (2004) Why professionals fail to catch liars and how they can improve. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9 (2). pp. 159-181. ISSN 1355-3259 10.1348/1355325041719356 Walras, L. (1954) Elements of Pure Economics: Or the Theory of Social Wealth. Routledge

Walter , Henrik (2002) “Neurophilosophy of free will”. In The Oxford handbook on free will , 565–576. Robert H. Kane , ed. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Weitzenhoffer, A. M. and Sjuberg, B. M. (1961) Suggestibility with and without 'induction of hypnosis'. Journal ofNervous and Mental Disease, 132: 204–220. Westen, D. Klepser, J. Ruffins, S. Lifton, N. Silverman, S. Boekamp, J. (1991) Object Relations in Childhood and Adolescence: The Development of Working Representations. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology Issue: Vol. 59, No. 3, 400-409.the American Psychological Association, Inc. William Poundstone (2011) Priceless: The Myth of Fair Value. 1st Ed. Hill and Wang. Williams, K. D., Bourgeois, M. J., & Croyle, R. T. (1993). The effects of stealing thunder in criminal and civil trials. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 597–609 Williamson, Mccoll, Mathews, Mitchell, Raven, Morgan (2002) Brain activation by central command during actual and imagined handgrip under hypnosis. Journal of Applied Physiology 92: 1317–1324, 2002; Wilson, Timothy D., Christopher Houston, Kathryn Etling, and Nancy Brekke (1996) A New Look at Anchoring Effects: Basic Anchoring and Its Antecedents. American Psychological Association. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1996, Vol. 125, No. 4, 387-402 Winch, P. (1990) The Idea of a Social Science: And Its Relation to Philosophy. Routledge,

Wiseman, R. (2009). 59 Seconds: Think a Little, Change a Lot. London, UK: Pan Macmillan Worchel, S., Lee, J., and Adewole, A. (1975). Effects of supply and demand on ratings of object value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 906-914 Yasmin Anwar (2011)Scientists use brain imaging to reveal the movies in our mind. Date Accessed 13/11/2012. http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2011/09/22/brain-movies/ Younkins,E. (2005: 23) Philosophers of Capitalism. Lexington Books Zajonc, Robert B. (1968). "Attitudinal Effects Of Mere Exposure". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 9 (2, Pt.2): 1–27. [7]Draft of an article to appear in The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (Rob Wilson and Frank Kiel, editors), Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1997. Copyright c 1997 Jon Doyle. All rights reserved http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/doyle/publications/br99.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_economics. Date Accessed (11/11/2012) Libet, (1985) Behavioral and Brain Sciences Behavioral and Brain Sciences (1985), 8: 529-539. Copyright © Cambridge University Press