Former Community – We Moved

🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.

ForumResources: Researches, Studies, TheoriesProducts Q&AShould you start from PU, or from …

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Should you start from PU, or from the "basics"?

#1 · June 3, 2023, 12:01 pm

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on June 3, 2023, 12:01 pm
I was replying to this question:
I understand that power university is marketed, as an advanced social skills course…. And out of all the courses, yours is the only one I trust to provide value.
But would it be wise for someone like me, Who is extremely socially inept. To invest in a course like this?
Would it be too overwhelming for a beginner like me? If it is, where would you recommend I start?
The usual stance on this used to be:
Start from the basics first.
But I'm not 100% sure of that anymore.
Why not?
Here is why:
1. I did NOT start from the basics
Call this the "(potentially) hypocritical advice".
Such as, to advice one thing, and do another.
I did NOT start with the basics.
As a matter of fact, while many would think that as a teacher of more advanced social skills I mastered the basics, I don't even think I'm so good at them.
2. Only some of the basics are important
Only some of the basics are important
The basics that matter are:
Reading/interpreting emotions
Reading/interpreting character
Reading/interpreting body language
Reading/interpreting/taking action on power dynamics
HOWEVER...
3. The most important basics are NOT taught by most social skills courses/books
You're not going to learn THOSE important basics in most resources.
Instead, you'll learn basics such as:
Entering groups
Exiting conversations gracefully
Transition between topics
And yes, those are very helpful, but...
Not nearly enough as the foundations above.
Call these "limited-use foundations".
They're great to come across as a socialite, do well in the old-school high societies, but... Not SO crucial to achieve most life-relevant goals.
4. "Good enough" is all you need in the "limited use foundations" before achieving more important goals
You don't need to be great at many of the "limited use" basics.
Going back to my own example:
I never was "great" at some of the basics.
I'm still not.
That hasn't stopped me from reaching most of the more advanced and "juicier" goals I wanted to reach -including career advancement, dating more adn better, getting what I wanted in negotiations, making new friends, naturally becoming the "good leader" in romantic relationships, etc. etc).
Sure, one may say that my starting level of basic social skills may have not been "inept level", but it still wasn't that good at all.
5. ROI matters: time you spend on many basics has more limited ROI
Learning is a time investment.
And the time you spend on the less useful stuff is time you waste not getting the more useful ones.
6. There is enough overlap that you can learn the basics from the most advanced
Foundations and "more advanced" aren't silos.
And as you learn power dynamics, chances are that you will also improve the basics.
For example, if you can influence people and sell, chances are that you can also maintain a "good enoguh" conversation.
And if you can find a mate who will like you, chances are that you can also talk to a woman without being weird.
7. Power dynamics IS foundational
Finally, a change of approach.
Many of the skills on gaining status, respect, attraction, influence etc. ARE basics.
It's simply that the self-help industry missed out on them.
In sum: start with what's most effective
So right now I'm considering a different approach to learn.
Not necessarily "from the ground up" but "from what's most effective".
And, in many cases, most effective may -may!- mean starting from the more advanced stages that are most likely to give you the results you're looking for.
In our case, less "how to do small talk", and more "how to behave high power".
Thoughts?
I'm still reflecting on this.
What do you think?
What's been your experience?
If you started from the basics, or from the more advanced, how did that work for you?

I was replying to this question:

I understand that power university is marketed, as an advanced social skills course…. And out of all the courses, yours is the only one I trust to provide value.
But would it be wise for someone like me, Who is extremely socially inept. To invest in a course like this?
Would it be too overwhelming for a beginner like me? If it is, where would you recommend I start?

The usual stance on this used to be:

Start from the basics first.

But I'm not 100% sure of that anymore.

Why not?

Here is why:

1. I did NOT start from the basics

Call this the "(potentially) hypocritical advice".

Such as, to advice one thing, and do another.

I did NOT start with the basics.

As a matter of fact, while many would think that as a teacher of more advanced social skills I mastered the basics, I don't even think I'm so good at them.

2. Only some of the basics are important

Only some of the basics are important

The basics that matter are:

Reading/interpreting emotions
Reading/interpreting character
Reading/interpreting body language
Reading/interpreting/taking action on power dynamics

HOWEVER...

3. The most important basics are NOT taught by most social skills courses/books

You're not going to learn THOSE important basics in most resources.

Instead, you'll learn basics such as:

Entering groups
Exiting conversations gracefully
Transition between topics

And yes, those are very helpful, but...

Not nearly enough as the foundations above.

Call these "limited-use foundations".

They're great to come across as a socialite, do well in the old-school high societies, but... Not SO crucial to achieve most life-relevant goals.

4. "Good enough" is all you need in the "limited use foundations" before achieving more important goals

You don't need to be great at many of the "limited use" basics.

Going back to my own example:

I never was "great" at some of the basics.
I'm still not.

That hasn't stopped me from reaching most of the more advanced and "juicier" goals I wanted to reach -including career advancement, dating more adn better, getting what I wanted in negotiations, making new friends, naturally becoming the "good leader" in romantic relationships, etc. etc).

Sure, one may say that my starting level of basic social skills may have not been "inept level", but it still wasn't that good at all.

5. ROI matters: time you spend on many basics has more limited ROI

Learning is a time investment.

And the time you spend on the less useful stuff is time you waste not getting the more useful ones.

6. There is enough overlap that you can learn the basics from the most advanced

Foundations and "more advanced" aren't silos.

And as you learn power dynamics, chances are that you will also improve the basics.

For example, if you can influence people and sell, chances are that you can also maintain a "good enoguh" conversation.

And if you can find a mate who will like you, chances are that you can also talk to a woman without being weird.

7. Power dynamics IS foundational

Finally, a change of approach.

Many of the skills on gaining status, respect, attraction, influence etc. ARE basics.

It's simply that the self-help industry missed out on them.

In sum: start with what's most effective

So right now I'm considering a different approach to learn.

Not necessarily "from the ground up" but "from what's most effective".

And, in many cases, most effective may -may!- mean starting from the more advanced stages that are most likely to give you the results you're looking for.

In our case, less "how to do small talk", and more "how to behave high power".

Thoughts?

I'm still reflecting on this.

What do you think?

What's been your experience?

If you started from the basics, or from the more advanced, how did that work for you?

Ali Scarlett, Transitioned and 4 other users have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#2 · June 3, 2023, 12:31 pm

Quote from B on June 3, 2023, 12:31 pm
Beautifully written, and I agree 100%.
PU is probably more useful for those who don't have the basics down, than for those who have basic social skills - or, in any case, useful as well.
One very good lawyer recruiter suggests on his website that most of the top-tier rainmaker attorneys are somewhat of "social misfits": they don't have many friendships, and yet they have more business and clients than other attorneys who do have very active social lives.
It ties in nicely with what you write: that the most value for bucks (life) is not necessarily in the "basics".
It also ties with my personal experience: I was able to get some of the "basics" (eg thanking back, responding to emotional bids) only after learning some "power self-defense" and "reading people".
Because: it's very difficult to learn the basics when you're surrounded by takers who exploit whatever you say to their power advantage. And, conversely, it's easy to learn the basics when you mostly interact with good normal people, who will help save face you if you make an inadvertent faux pas, and thus "teach you" the basics by their very good nature.
You also wrote elsewhere that self-defense comes before putting ourselves out in the world with positive bids - if nothing else, because you can't give anything if you're constantly being stolen from.
My experience
I used to focus on the "basics" (ie making friends, being sociable, etc.) at the very start of my path, mostly in order to meet a woman, and in order to have a career that would give me financial and economical independence - but it didn't work.
Only after I started focusing single-mindedly on my specific objectives was I able to make gains toward them.
Sometimes even at the expense of other, "socially-accepted" aspects of life.
Conversely, learning power dynamics has freed mental space in my head to learn more "basics" now.
What is useful
What is useful is what is mostly relevant to one's personal objectives in a specific moment.
If one wants to learn how to meet women, yes - becoming more social is going to help; but it's not the most "value for bucks" activity.
Learning to approach - and learning all the other skills involved - is infinitely more useful - and probably more difficult as well.
One can have a "good" relationship with a woman while having no friends, being unable to handle groups of people, and liking to be alone.
Conversely, one can be full of friends and the "life of the party", and be seen as totally unattractive by the opposite sex.
I believe one can know what is useful to a person by what a person's words and thoughts continually speak about.
If someone asks a question here, for example, it's most likely that that is a serious sticking point for that specific person.
The "basics" are mostly misrepresented
Another fundamental issue, as you write above, is that the "basics" are mostly misrepresented - by almost everyone.
Most people, most teachers and most books misrepresent the basics as Dale Carnegie does in his book.
Or as "go and introduce yourself". Or "always be polite". Or "compliment a woman to make her like you".
But those are not the basics. Those are twisted, useless, counteproductive simplifications of politically-correct visions of reality that do not exist.
Nobody - with few exceptions - is going to tell you the pure, unadulterated truth of what works. Mostly because they themselves don't consciously want to realize that what they do works for reasons other than what they are prepared to accept.
So learning the "basics" from someone who has not only proven success, but also very low cognitive dissonance in life and very high congruence in actions and thoughts is infinitely more helpful than learning the "basics" from someone who is full of neuroses or personality disorders.
But then, they are not "basics" anymore. They are "practical, real-life tested and approved high-level advanced basics".
EDIT: That's why I was always in favor of expanding PU with some "social basics", or rather "high-level advanced basics".

Beautifully written, and I agree 100%.

PU is probably more useful for those who don't have the basics down, than for those who have basic social skills - or, in any case, useful as well.

One very good lawyer recruiter suggests on his website that most of the top-tier rainmaker attorneys are somewhat of "social misfits": they don't have many friendships, and yet they have more business and clients than other attorneys who do have very active social lives.

It ties in nicely with what you write: that the most value for bucks (life) is not necessarily in the "basics".

It also ties with my personal experience: I was able to get some of the "basics" (eg thanking back, responding to emotional bids) only after learning some "power self-defense" and "reading people".

Because: it's very difficult to learn the basics when you're surrounded by takers who exploit whatever you say to their power advantage. And, conversely, it's easy to learn the basics when you mostly interact with good normal people, who will help save face you if you make an inadvertent faux pas, and thus "teach you" the basics by their very good nature.

You also wrote elsewhere that self-defense comes before putting ourselves out in the world with positive bids - if nothing else, because you can't give anything if you're constantly being stolen from.

My experience

I used to focus on the "basics" (ie making friends, being sociable, etc.) at the very start of my path, mostly in order to meet a woman, and in order to have a career that would give me financial and economical independence - but it didn't work.

Only after I started focusing single-mindedly on my specific objectives was I able to make gains toward them.

Sometimes even at the expense of other, "socially-accepted" aspects of life.

Conversely, learning power dynamics has freed mental space in my head to learn more "basics" now.

What is useful

What is useful is what is mostly relevant to one's personal objectives in a specific moment.

If one wants to learn how to meet women, yes - becoming more social is going to help; but it's not the most "value for bucks" activity.

Learning to approach - and learning all the other skills involved - is infinitely more useful - and probably more difficult as well.

One can have a "good" relationship with a woman while having no friends, being unable to handle groups of people, and liking to be alone.

Conversely, one can be full of friends and the "life of the party", and be seen as totally unattractive by the opposite sex.

I believe one can know what is useful to a person by what a person's words and thoughts continually speak about.

If someone asks a question here, for example, it's most likely that that is a serious sticking point for that specific person.

The "basics" are mostly misrepresented

Another fundamental issue, as you write above, is that the "basics" are mostly misrepresented - by almost everyone.

Most people, most teachers and most books misrepresent the basics as Dale Carnegie does in his book.

Or as "go and introduce yourself". Or "always be polite". Or "compliment a woman to make her like you".

But those are not the basics. Those are twisted, useless, counteproductive simplifications of politically-correct visions of reality that do not exist.

Nobody - with few exceptions - is going to tell you the pure, unadulterated truth of what works. Mostly because they themselves don't consciously want to realize that what they do works for reasons other than what they are prepared to accept.

So learning the "basics" from someone who has not only proven success, but also very low cognitive dissonance in life and very high congruence in actions and thoughts is infinitely more helpful than learning the "basics" from someone who is full of neuroses or personality disorders.

But then, they are not "basics" anymore. They are "practical, real-life tested and approved high-level advanced basics".

EDIT: That's why I was always in favor of expanding PU with some "social basics", or rather "high-level advanced basics".

Lucio Buffalmano, Ali Scarlett and 2 other users have reacted to this post.

#3 · June 3, 2023, 1:44 pm

BOOM!

Awesome post, thank you for sharing, Bel!

I think this concept now deserves an article.

By the way, I realized this when I spoke yesterday with @Ali (Ali, we may want to amend this in The Social Strategist, too).

Ali had mentioned something like "keep in mind I never went through the basics of social skills".

And then it flashed in front of my eyes how:

Ali advanced super fast anyway
It certainly didn't seem like he was missing the basics at all
I could recall concrete instances where it was advanced concepts that propelled Ali forward, rather than the "limited usability basics"

One example:

Ali had assertively enforced boundaries of "not let me wait" with a mentor of his.
In many situations, that would have been great.
However, that was not super well-calibrated because she was a bigger giver in the relationship (so, as situationally enjoying that giving, Ali was better served to not enforce perfect equality in the "showing up on time" area).
It was the social exchange dynamics that made that clear.
The social exchange should be basic, but since few resources teach it, it's actually one of those types of "advanced basis".

Ali Scarlett, Kavalier and 2 other users have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#4 · June 3, 2023, 1:54 pm

P.S.:

If anyone has anything to add or share, I'm happy to read.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#5 · June 3, 2023, 5:08 pm

Quote from Ali Scarlett on June 3, 2023, 5:08 pm
Yes, I'd also add that it's sometimes actually harder to learn the basics if you don't start with the advanced material first.
And the reason for that is, as a beginner with no advanced knowledge, some of the people one would be interacting with would also be beginners with no advanced knowledge. And that makes it difficult to know if you're doing something right because their feedback can often be inaccurate. (It's a case of the blind leading the blind.)
For example, one way to develop and refine one's sense of humor is by telling jokes more often. And the only way to know if you should keep or discard a certain joke (or a type of joke) is by gauging how the crowd reacts.
But, if you're in a crowd of people with no taste in good humor, then you're not getting good feedback and it becomes harder to make good decisions moving forward regarding which jokes you should keep or throw away.
And the same applies to basic social skills.
Advanced material helps the speaker know that what they're saying is the right thing to say and understand when it's the receiver who's actually in the wrong. Without that ability to provide quality self-feedback, a learner only starting with the basics will take much longer to advance.
That's what happened when I first started out, before discovering TPM.
In my former environment, not many others worked on improving their social skills (and especially not with any scientific system proven to make people socially effective).
The primary reasons they didn't make a priority of developing their social skills were because:
They felt that their social skills were already good enough for them to get by: not everyone has the drive to do better than "just getting by" and even if they did, not everyone is aware of the advanced training to reach the next levels.
They felt their social skills would naturally get better over time: it's how we did it in our early school years where I grew up. The more we talked to people, the better we got at talking to people. So, some people just rationalized to themselves, "Who needs a 'system' when I can just improve through regular conversation, right?"
They've read the popular literature and think they already know enough now: they read How to Win Friends and Influence People and think that's all they really need (and that if they're not good enough yet it's because they're not applying that book's principles well enough yet).
So, I'd talk to people and at times throughout the conversation get a slightly odd look or silence as if I'd said something wrong which made me feel like I had indeed made a mistake. But, sometimes, it was really them who just still needed to improve.
And it was only when I started learning the advanced material that I could know the difference.
OFF-TOPIC
BTW, Lucio, I don't actually get the email notification if you only write the first name, "Ali". It would need to be the full username, "@AliScarlett".
OFF-TOPIC
Edit:
Changed some wording.

Yes, I'd also add that it's sometimes actually harder to learn the basics if you don't start with the advanced material first.

And the reason for that is, as a beginner with no advanced knowledge, some of the people one would be interacting with would also be beginners with no advanced knowledge. And that makes it difficult to know if you're doing something right because their feedback can often be inaccurate. (It's a case of the blind leading the blind.)

For example, one way to develop and refine one's sense of humor is by telling jokes more often. And the only way to know if you should keep or discard a certain joke (or a type of joke) is by gauging how the crowd reacts.

But, if you're in a crowd of people with no taste in good humor, then you're not getting good feedback and it becomes harder to make good decisions moving forward regarding which jokes you should keep or throw away.

And the same applies to basic social skills.

Advanced material helps the speaker know that what they're saying is the right thing to say and understand when it's the receiver who's actually in the wrong. Without that ability to provide quality self-feedback, a learner only starting with the basics will take much longer to advance.

That's what happened when I first started out, before discovering TPM.

In my former environment, not many others worked on improving their social skills (and especially not with any scientific system proven to make people socially effective).

The primary reasons they didn't make a priority of developing their social skills were because:

They felt that their social skills were already good enough for them to get by: not everyone has the drive to do better than "just getting by" and even if they did, not everyone is aware of the advanced training to reach the next levels.
They felt their social skills would naturally get better over time: it's how we did it in our early school years where I grew up. The more we talked to people, the better we got at talking to people. So, some people just rationalized to themselves, "Who needs a 'system' when I can just improve through regular conversation, right?"
They've read the popular literature and think they already know enough now: they read How to Win Friends and Influence People and think that's all they really need (and that if they're not good enough yet it's because they're not applying that book's principles well enough yet).

So, I'd talk to people and at times throughout the conversation get a slightly odd look or silence as if I'd said something wrong which made me feel like I had indeed made a mistake. But, sometimes, it was really them who just still needed to improve.

And it was only when I started learning the advanced material that I could know the difference.

OFF-TOPIC

BTW, Lucio, I don't actually get the email notification if you only write the first name, "Ali". It would need to be the full username, "@AliScarlett".

OFF-TOPIC

Edit:

Changed some wording.

Lucio Buffalmano, Jack and 3 other users have reacted to this post.

#6 · June 3, 2023, 9:46 pm

Quote from Mats G on June 3, 2023, 9:46 pm
I agree with what's been written here already.
Personally I have large holes in my basic social skills, but they were much worse before I went through PU.
After having gone through multiple social skills courses that "teach the basics" I still think I learned a lot more about basic socializing by learning power dynamics.
While I can understand that a person who is completely socially incompetent might struggle with PU, the amount of people that fall into that category are probably less than 1%. I think most people who see themselves as socially incompetent (including me in the past) fail to realize just how much they already know. If you think about socializing like a game, all you need in order to play and get better is to understand the rules. You could play and improve at chess as long as you know the rules, even if you don't know even the most basic strategies. While socializing is a very difficult thing, the basic rules are quite simple: if you treat people poorly they generally won't like you, and if you treat them well they generally will like you. As long as you understand this you know more than enough to improve in whatever area you prefer, whether it's the basics or straight into the advanced stuff.
There's also another benefit to learning the advanced stuff before the basics. It is generally more fun. When I started playing guitar I was taught the "proper way" by doing scales and exercises, but it was so boring that I nearly quit. It was only when I started playing on my own, picking songs that were too advanced for me and learning advanced techniques that I started enjoying it and having fun. That led to me playing every day for years, sometimes for hours on end. I would never have done this if I tried to force myself to stick to the boring basic exercises that I was "supposed to" do. And also, now that I'm starting to go back to the basics it's a lot more fun because I have a deeper understanding and appreciation for why it's important.
I really don't see why it would be any different with social skills and power dynamics. Yes, I believe that theoretically one should start with the basics and move towards advanced gradually to get the best results, but what is theoretically the best way doesn't always work as well in the real world.
I also share Bel's opinion that adding some basics of social skills to PU could be good. That would also put to rest the fears of "is this course too advanced for me?"

I agree with what's been written here already.

Personally I have large holes in my basic social skills, but they were much worse before I went through PU.

After having gone through multiple social skills courses that "teach the basics" I still think I learned a lot more about basic socializing by learning power dynamics.

While I can understand that a person who is completely socially incompetent might struggle with PU, the amount of people that fall into that category are probably less than 1%. I think most people who see themselves as socially incompetent (including me in the past) fail to realize just how much they already know. If you think about socializing like a game, all you need in order to play and get better is to understand the rules. You could play and improve at chess as long as you know the rules, even if you don't know even the most basic strategies. While socializing is a very difficult thing, the basic rules are quite simple: if you treat people poorly they generally won't like you, and if you treat them well they generally will like you. As long as you understand this you know more than enough to improve in whatever area you prefer, whether it's the basics or straight into the advanced stuff.

There's also another benefit to learning the advanced stuff before the basics. It is generally more fun. When I started playing guitar I was taught the "proper way" by doing scales and exercises, but it was so boring that I nearly quit. It was only when I started playing on my own, picking songs that were too advanced for me and learning advanced techniques that I started enjoying it and having fun. That led to me playing every day for years, sometimes for hours on end. I would never have done this if I tried to force myself to stick to the boring basic exercises that I was "supposed to" do. And also, now that I'm starting to go back to the basics it's a lot more fun because I have a deeper understanding and appreciation for why it's important.

I really don't see why it would be any different with social skills and power dynamics. Yes, I believe that theoretically one should start with the basics and move towards advanced gradually to get the best results, but what is theoretically the best way doesn't always work as well in the real world.

I also share Bel's opinion that adding some basics of social skills to PU could be good. That would also put to rest the fears of "is this course too advanced for me?"

Lucio Buffalmano, Kavalier and B have reacted to this post.

#7 · June 3, 2023, 11:42 pm

Thank you Mats, awesome post.

Great points, which if you allow me to sum up:

The truly "inept" may indeed start from the very beginning... (agree, albeit I'm not sure if we should include autistic/Asperger since the more analytical approach may help them)
... However, that's a tiny minority and most people do already have the basics
The "more advanced" material can indeed make the learning more interesting

Kavalier, Zathrian and Mats G have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#8 · June 4, 2023, 5:16 am

Great discussion guys when there's an article I will be reading it not once.

A couple of sharings from my personal experience.

For me people learn by imitation. So for me it wasn't about basics and advanced but more about gaps and calibration. And applying the basics consistently.

I had interacted with the C-suite and learnt some good techniques but sometimes I would apply them in the wrong situation and fail horribly. And yes power dynamics over social skills unfortunately. You only have to look at Trump - after the soap opera he made of America he's still the front runner. One of the things I'm working on is being more serious. I'm a joker by nature but you shouldn't be a one note symphony and everywhere you look there are guys who are just all business at both work and home and they're rising up.

On consistency if you're a natural introvert like me most of the time you can observe the social niceties and keep other focused. But its draining and when you get tired/sick/stressed you tend to revert to your nature and there's no cure for that but relentless practice so whether its basic or advanced the practice will help you to embed that mindset.

Lucio Buffalmano, Kavalier and Mats G have reacted to this post.

#9 · June 4, 2023, 7:17 am

Thank you Transitioned!

Great points.

If I may attempt to summarize, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, it sounds like you may say:

People learn by imitation, so it's less about "basics VS advanced", and more about "having good role models" (that are good at both)
Power dynamics above "basic" social skills for life results

Transitioned, Kavalier and Zathrian have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#10 · June 4, 2023, 7:48 am

Still sick - keep forgetting things. The last point I meant to say is that PU is amazing for the quality of the framework and the community. Most framework's are rubbish - they can't explain a high proportion of observed behaviour aka facts.

I had a lot of tricks and some social skills to start with. The problem was without a framework it was hard to put the techniques in context and improve. You'd read some book that disagreed with another book. And you don't have time to experiment on your own, that's where the amazing community on the forum comes in. Not only with examples but looking at the PU material from different viewpoints. You can borrow a bit from each person. John's unique perspective as both a doctor and engineer and amazing social experiments through his work and friendship groups, Bel's incredible in-depth analysis and legal mind, some of the young guys verbal shortcuts, etc/ raining soup here if you put your bowl out. Now I have default actions, set pieces, fall-backs. I still have my stupid days but the average has moved up a bit. And that's improvement :-)

Lucio Buffalmano, Kavalier and 2 other users have reacted to this post.