Trial Lawyer Jefferson Fisher Launches AI Communication Coach to Target Conflict Resolution

诉讼律师Jefferson Fisher推出AI沟通教练，旨在化解冲突 关系的破裂并非源于缺乏爱，而是因为在日常沟通不畅时未能及时发起微小修复，日积月累所致。 诉讼律师Jefferson Fisher详细拆解了适用于高风险对话、冲突解决以及个人关系的实用沟通策略。他解释了如何识别并化解操控者与自恋者的攻势，建议运用“灰石法”（grey rocking）和刻意停顿等冷静沉着的方法，而不是诉诸情绪化反应。Fisher强调，有效的沟通依赖于真诚、专注和即时的情感修复，建议人们不要一味追求在争执中取胜，而应转为寻求真正的理解与联结。此外，他还提供了用于确立界限、化解悲伤以及平息职场或人际攻击的具体工具。 人际关系的破裂往往不是因为不再相爱，而是在日常冲突中错失了数百次微小的修复机会。 (0:00) 在任何高风险沟通中，终极目标应是建立相互理解与修复关系，而非争夺输赢；降低语调并放慢语速能让你成为对话中的定海神针。 (9:27) 煤气灯效应（Gaslighting）旨在扭曲现实并让人怀疑自身记忆；使用“我对此有不同的记忆”等中立回应可有效降温冲突，避免落入操纵者的叙事陷阱。 (27:22) 自恋操纵者往往缺乏为他人高兴的能力、习惯扮演受害者并极度在乎公众形象；面对挑衅时拒绝自证并保持冷静，即可剥夺其掌控权。 (39:06) 认可伴侣的情绪并不代表认输或放弃自身观点，而是通过确认对方的情感状态来建立安全感，从而化解对立。 (60:46)

Trial lawyer Jefferson Fisher argues that effective communication and conflict management depend on emotional composure, presence, and intentional repair rather than an urge to win arguments or satisfy external approval. Emotional Regulation as a Tool for Control (9:27) Fisher asserts that the primary objective of communication is gaining composure and mutual understanding rather than prevailing in an argument. When facing an aggressive counterpart, reacting with an emotional outburst signals insecurity and discounts the credibility of the message. Instead, Fisher advises communicators to lower their speaking volume and slow their cadence, effectively acting as an "anchor" that forces the other party to match their calmer frequency. Controlled emotional intensity can serve a deliberate purpose—such as maintaining clear standards—whereas chaotic outbursts stem from a lack of self-control. In high-pressure legal environments, nonverbal presence reinforces authority. Fisher outlines courtroom strategies such as familiarizing oneself with the room beforehand to signal ease, accepting unfavorable rulings with a composed "Thank you, Judge," and minimizing objections. Constantly objecting or visibly reacting to setbacks signals weakness to decision-makers, whereas unruffled restraint preserves credibility and trust. Neutralizing Gaslighting and Narcissistic Tactics (22:28) Fisher distinguishes ordinary lying from gaslighting, defining the latter as an effort to alter another person's reality and erode their confidence in their own memory, perception, and sanity. Manipulators often seek absolute narrative control, operating on a binary dynamic of demanding constant praise or provoking conflict to extract emotional control. To dismantle gaslighting without endless debate, Fisher recommends slowing down the exchange and delivering a neutral, anchored response such as, "I remember that differently," effectively refusing to fill the conversational trap. When dealing with narcissistic individuals in workplaces or cross-examinations, Fisher leverages their intense focus on external perception. Rather than engaging in defensive point-scoring, asking questions like, "And you think the jury is going to like that?" prompts them to moderate their behavior to protect their image. He notes that while insecure individuals often seek growth and genuine attachment, narcissists view themselves as beyond improvement, leaving disengagement and neutral responses ("grey rocking") as the most practical defenses. Preventing Relational Erosion Through Active Repair (60:46) Relationships rarely collapse over a single catastrophic event; Fisher contends they deteriorate through hundreds of small, missed moments for repair. Emotional validation does not require agreeing with a partner's premise or abandoning core boundaries, but it demands acknowledging the legitimacy of their feelings using phrases such as, "I can see how you interpreted it that way." Avoiding difficult conversations to secure short-term peace frequently fosters long-term resentment, leaving partners feeling trapped or "caged." Fisher distinguishes being "nice"—a superficial, conflict-avoidant habit—from being "kind," which prioritizes genuine connection through honest dialogue. When emotional reactions appear disproportionate, Fisher cites the therapeutic adage, "If it's hysterical, it's historical," explaining that surface disputes over domestic habits or spending usually point to unresolved childhood narratives. To manage escalating friction, couples can implement explicit verbal cues, such as calling a time-out when an emotional "battery is in the red" or asking for a clean conversational "reset." Presence, Restraint, and Actionable Support (124:18) Fisher identifies authentic presence as an essential pillar of communication, warning that digital distractions—such as checking mobile phones during conversations—break relational rapport. He advises external thinkers to stop overexplaining, using the metaphor of being a calm "well" holding knowledge rather than an overwhelming "waterfall" of words. Pausing before speaking ("letting your first word be your breath") introduces thoughtful pacing and commands attention. When addressing grief and personal tragedy, Fisher cautions against passive platitudes such as "Let me know if you need anything," which burden the grieving individual with logistical chores. Practical support involves proactive, concrete interventions—such as delivering a meal, doing laundry, or sending a focused message with no expectation of a reply—alongside explicit validation of the person's pain. Fisher's framework highlights that long-term relational and professional stability depends on continuous, deliberate communication habits. The conversation leaves open the practical challenge of balancing rigid personal boundaries against an empathetic accommodation of a partner's emotional needs over decades.

德克萨斯州出庭律师 Jefferson Fisher 提出，高难度沟通的核心目的不是在争论中“获胜”，而是建立控制力、保持真实临场感并实现情感修复。他系统阐述了应对操纵、拆解冲突升级以及在职场与亲密关系中建立健康边界的实用沟通框架。 高难度沟通的五大支柱与控制力重塑 (0:00) Fisher 指出，卓越沟通依赖五大核心支柱：保持真实临场感、减少干扰、停止过度解释、应对悲伤与哀伤，以及应对自恋者与煤气灯操控者。他在法庭实战中观察到，许多人错误地将争论的目标定为“取胜”，但即便赢得判决，委托人也往往因为未得到真诚道歉而无法释怀。沟通中的沉默同样代价高昂，在职场可能错失晋升机会，在个人关系中则会逐渐侵蚀联结。关系破裂往往不是因为爱意消逝，而是在上百次本可以进行修补的瞬间错失了沟通机会。 面对高压或攻击性对话，保持控制的关键在于成为对话的“锚点”，通过放慢语速、降低音量促使对方匹配自己的平静频率。情绪爆发会让听众忽视陈述的真实性，并被视为不稳重与不安全感的体现。在非语言层面，自信表现为“从容自如如同故地重游”，例如在开庭前熟悉法庭环境以建立心理主场，以及在遭遇不利裁决时平静回应，避免叹气或翻白眼等暴露破绽的小动作。 识别与瓦解煤气灯操纵及自恋控制 (22:28) Fisher 将煤气灯效应与普通说谎区分开来：谎言停留于表面事实的歪曲，而煤气灯操纵旨在篡改受害者的现实认知，使其怀疑自身的记忆、判断力与心智状态，其动机在于自保与夺取叙事控制权。具有焦虑型依恋风格的人更容易受其影响，因为这类人群倾向于通过外部共情调节情绪，往往为了维持和谐而放弃自我现实感。应对此类操纵的最佳策略是彻底放慢对话，使用中立陈述如“我的记忆并非如此”来锚定立场，拒绝跳入对方预设的自辩陷阱。 针对职场中的操纵型自恋者，Fisher 总结了三大核心特征：无法为他人的成功感到高兴、持有受害者心态，以及缺乏同理心却极度在意外界评价。自恋者的行为在“寻求赞美”与“蓄意挑衅”之间循环，两者皆服务于获取控制感。在应对策略上，除了物理与数字层面的减少接触，可采用“灰狗战术”（Grey Rocking），以冷淡、中立的回应切断对方的情绪供给；在法庭交叉质询时，则可利用其虚荣心，通过“你认为陪审团会认同这一点吗”等发问迫使其调整极端姿态。 亲密关系中的情绪对齐与即时修补 在亲密关系中，回避短期冲突往往会演变成长期危机。Fisher 与 Steven Bartlett 探讨发现，濒临破裂的伴侣最常使用的词是“被囚禁感”（caged），这源于误将情感共情视为必须让渡自身原则的零和博弈。健康的应对方式是承认“两种事实可以并存”：在肯定伴侣情绪体验的同时，保留个人核心立场。当伴侣做出过激反应时，往往契合“过激反应必有既往创伤”（If it's hysterical, it's historical）的规律，根源多来自童年未满足的深层需求而非眼前琐事。 Fisher 强调，关系的维系依赖于及时的情绪验证与主动修补，例如运用“我能理解你为什么这么想”或“这听起来确实令人沮丧”来降温。当对话偏离轨道时，双方可以像打出 Uno 功能牌一样主动喊“重置”（Reset），请求重新表达；也可以拆分议题，避免将过往不满堆积到当前争论中。此外，引入电量百分比评估（如宣告自己只剩 10% 精力）或设定“电量见红”即刻暂停五分钟的机制，能有效阻止破坏性争吵升级。 以真实临场感替代过度解释与虚假客套 Fisher 提出，真正的沟通影响力源于极致的临场感，而非语言的堆砌。他主张在表达时“做一口深井，而非瀑布”，因为滔滔不绝的过度解释往往源自不安全感，会导致核心信息被噪音掩盖；而像深井一样沉稳储备信息，才能赋予对方提问的空间。在开口前践行“以呼吸作为第一个字”，主动留出数秒沉默，不仅能展现从容与威严，也能确保每一次发声经过深思熟虑。同时，必须警惕“过分客气”（Nice）与“真诚友善”（Kind）的区别：前者停留在表面附和以求避免冲突，后者则基于真正联结提供坦诚反馈。 在日常互动中，注意力分散是破坏临场感的最主要因素。红绳实验生动证明，对话中一旦低头看手机，人际间的情感张力便会瞬间松弛并带来被轻视感。智能手机已成为现代人的情绪安慰剂，阻断了真实的连接。此外，面对处于哀伤中的人，应坚决避免说“有需要随时叫我”，这种被动询问实际上给身心俱疲者增添了决策负担；真正有力量的关怀是直接付诸具体行动，如默默送去一顿晚餐或代做家务，并坦诚确认对方正在承受的不公与痛苦。 Fisher 的核心论点在于，沟通技巧的本质并非辞令争胜，而是通过情绪自律、确立边界和深度临场感来管理高风险人际互动。不过，这些基于法庭辩论与成年人理性推演的策略，在面对极端病态人格或严重不对等权力结构时，中立回应与温和边界能否完全奏效，仍取决于当事人是否有退出该互动环境的实质选择权。

## Background 本期内容由知名播客频道 The Diary Of A CEO（主持人 Steven Bartlett）于 2025 年 12 月 22 日发布在 YouTube 平台上。视频特邀德克萨斯州资深出庭律师兼顶尖沟通专家 Jefferson Fisher，深入揭秘煤气灯效应（Gaslighting）与自恋型人格的操控机制，传授法庭级别的实战对话策略，指导听众如何在不提高音量的情况下掌控谈话、化解言语贬低并建立深度的人际尊重。 ## TL;DR Jefferson Fisher 围绕卓越沟通者的核心法则展开，指出真正自信的沟通始于自我价值感与真实性，而非滔滔不绝的过度解释。他分享了应对恶意言语攻击的三步降维反击法，主张在危机高压下像沉着的空乘一样充当情绪调节器，并在慰藉悲痛者时摒弃陈词滥调、直接付诸具体行动。针对亲密关系与团队协作，他提出了前置电量检查、重置请求与叫暂停机制，强调关系的质量完全取决于沟通的质量，成熟的伴侣与领袖能够通过建设性冲突实现关系的韧性修复。 ## Atmosphere & style 整场对话沉稳、睿智且极具心理穿透力，德州出庭律师特有的沉着气场与 Steven 深刻敏锐的提问相得益彰。现场穿插了红绳专注度测试等具象实验与生活化案例，将复杂的心理防御机制抽丝剥茧，呈现得生动鲜活。语调在冷静剖析操控本质与温暖关照人际创伤之间自如切换，听众不仅能感受到思维被点拨的顿悟快感，更能获得一种在纷乱人际博弈中找回从容掌控感的心灵抚慰。 ## Bulletin - [01:53:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6798s) 出庭律师 Jefferson Fisher 提出卓越沟通的五大核心法则：保持真实性与确立自我价值感、物理性消除手机等干扰物、停止过度解释以泉井取代瀑布、以具体行动而非陈词滥调慰藉悲痛者，以及运用沉默与精准反问化解言语贬低。 - [02:24:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8681s) 面对恶意言语挑衅，可通过保持5到7秒沉默、要求对方当众重复一次，并反问“你刚才那句话是故意想伤害我吗”的三步法，利用认知失调将审视焦点转回攻击者身上，迫使其退让或解除其掌控感。 - [02:31:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9079s) 亲密关系沟通的关键在于“先认可感受再表达情绪”与量化自身能量水平；引入如 Brené Brown 的电量百分比通报机制，在精力告急时果断启动“红电格”暂停，能有效阻断升级为毁灭性争吵的风险。 - [02:07:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7638s) 领导力与高压沟通的试金石是大难临头时的情绪调节力，如同镇定的空乘一般成为团队的情绪锚点，以“沉着漫步，绝不慌乱奔跑”的姿态降低场域焦虑温度。 ## Key takeaways - [01:45:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6309s) 谦逊的本质在于意识到自己和所有人一样糟糕且怪异，真正的格局体现于对幕后平凡工作人员的平视与尊重，而非迎合全场地位最高的人。 - [01:45:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6309s) 生活缝隙中的荒谬极值细节与琐碎微小善举（攀岩墙悖论与隐形公关），往往比重大公开汇报更能定义一个人的真实品格与长期声誉。 - [01:50:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6623s) 恶语在进化生物学和基因记忆中比赞美更具破坏力，言语互动具有跨代和跨情境的涟漪效应，会直接塑造周围人的情绪场域。 - [01:53:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6798s) 沟通技巧的底层是确认自我价值感；讨好型人格本质上是童年缺乏安全感所形成的防御机制，而真诚表达并不意味着强颜欢笑或当面说谎。 - [01:56:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6995s) 智能手机已成为现代成年人逃避静默与现实接触的“精神安抚奶嘴”；物理性移开手机是建立高张力倾听连接与人际尊重的核心举措。 - [02:04:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7452s) 停止过度解释，做到“不做倾泻的瀑布，去做沉静的泉井”，让第一个词化作一次深呼吸与留白，能大幅提升表达的公信力与从容气场。 - [02:07:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7678s) 真正的自信体现在敢于坦承局限与享受静默，“让我先想一想”展示了占据时间和空间的底气，也避免了慌乱应对。 - [02:10:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7838s) 优秀领导者的核心特质是大难临头时的情绪调节能力，通过充当处变不惊的“情绪锚点”来稳定团队，避免对小事频繁过度反应。 - [02:16:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8208s) 安慰悲痛者切忌说“有需要随时叫我”，这种客套实则是将求助负担转移给心力交瘁的受害者；最真诚的慰藉是直接提供具体实际的帮助并免除对方回复压力。 - [02:24:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8681s) 化解恶意贬低的三步降维打击：保持5-7秒尴尬沉默、要求对方重新说一遍、精准反问其伤害意图，利用人类不愿承认自己是恶人的认知失调瓦解挑衅。 - [02:28:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8923s) 大喊大叫与煤气灯操控的根源往往是攻击者自身失控的脆弱信号；以超脱好奇心和探究心态提问，能够反弹恶意并夺回对话主导权。 - [02:31:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9079s) 亲密关系沟通三大支柱：先确认认可对方感受、允许语气不当时像游戏重置般“重新说一次”，以及坚决切碎拆分议题、绝不翻旧账打包争吵。 - [02:34:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9244s) 婚姻从来不是机械的五五开对等，通过量化剩余能量百分比与设定“红电保护”强制暂停机制，能防止在低谷期以恶毒言语摧毁关系。 - [02:40:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9603s) 长期关系的预测指标在于创伤愈合后是获得了更强韧性还是留存积怨；关系的破裂大多不是源于爱意消失，而是源于停止了真正的沟通与修复。 - [02:42:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9724s) 决定孩子一生心理健康的最核心变量并非父母是否离异，而是父母处理冲突与界限的方式，成年人亦需学会释怀并原谅同样是第一次做人的父母。 ## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=0s) 成为卓越沟通者的五大核心要素与本期精要 访谈伊始，Steven Bartlett 与得克萨斯州资深诉讼律师、沟通专家 Jefferson Fisher 梳理了迈向卓越沟通者、在人生与职场中如愿以偿必须掌握的五个关键维度。Fisher 明确列出：第一是“真实性（authenticity）”，而全情投入的临场感（presence）则是最高境界的真实；第二是减少干扰（reduce distractions）；第三是停止过度解释（stop over-explaining）；第四是懂得如何承载与应对他人的悲伤情绪；第五则是必须掌握应对自恋狂（narcissist）与煤气灯操控者（gaslighter）的有效策略。Steven 现场还播放了一段在网络上引发热烈讨论的 Miley Cyrus 与 Naomi Campbell 互动短视频，Fisher 坦言那段交互尴尬到让人“难以直视（painful to watch）”。 节目随后展示了 Fisher 这套沟通体系在现实生活中的实用价值。作为专业出庭律师，他将法庭上的抗辩与冲突化解技巧带给大众，强调沟通是一项必须持续投入的“个人资产”。他指出，职场中如果不敢表达必要的观点，就会错失升迁机会；亲密关系中，绝大多数破裂并不是因为不再相爱，而是因为沟通脱节——正是由于成百上千次“这事太琐碎、没必要提”的心理，错失了本可完成情感修复的细小契机。有最新研究表明，父母关系对孩子心理健康的最大预测指标，甚至不是夫妻是否离婚，而是他们如何处理彼此之间的冲突。Fisher 强调，冲突并不可怕，只要掌握掌控感和自信，学会“不再将‘争对错’视作头等大事”，并且控制住第一时间冒出来的沮丧与挫败感，就能彻底化解他人的侮辱、傲慢与轻慢。 - 成为顶级沟通者的五大支柱：真实与临场、减少干扰、停止过度解释、善处他人悲伤、反制操纵与煤气灯效应。 - 关系的断裂本质：多起因于微小修复机会的放弃，而非激烈的爱意消退。 ### [02:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=138s) 从法庭抗辩到日常生活：为什么“赢”往往解决不了问题 在正式对谈中，Steven 邀请 Fisher 介绍自己的专业背景。Fisher 说明自己是一名经专业认证（board certified）的人身伤害诉讼律师，每天都需要真正走进法庭，面对法官、法警、法庭记录员、陪审团以及针锋相对的对方律师。诉讼律师的核心职责是在法庭上基于委托人的事实据理力争，以争取期望的判决结果。之所以将法庭经验写成书，是因为 Fisher 在对委托人进行证人质证（cross-examination）和庭外宣誓录供（deposition）培训时，发现绝大多数人对正面冲突充满极端恐惧。面对从未经历过的法庭环境，当事人往往处于人生中情绪最紧绷、压力最大的脆弱状态。 在长期的诉讼实战中，Fisher 洞察到了一个反常识的现象：无论是在法庭还是日常争辩中，人们总以为终极目标是“赢”（win）。但很多时候即便他帮委托人赢得了官司、争取到了应得的权益，委托人心中的问题与伤痛依然存在。他们真正渴求的，往往只是一句真诚的“对不起”——如果对方在最开始愿意道个歉，整个官司根本就不会发生。这促使 Fisher 致力于将应对高压冲突的技能普惠给普通人，让大家明白面对冲突不必天然畏惧，沟通不是不可捉摸的天赋，而是一门可以后天刻意习练并彻底掌握的技术。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 法庭到生活的冲突逻辑演进 accDescr: 展现从单纯追求争论胜利到建立可控沟通并化解根本心结的认知转变 subgraph Mindset["争端认知的错位"] A["传统执念：追求'必须争赢'"] --> B["赢得诉讼 / 辩论表面胜出"] B --> C["内心创伤与问题依然未解"] end subgraph Solution["健康沟通的解法"] D["掌握冲突应对与控场技巧"] --> E["直面情绪内核：承认与道歉"] E --> F["获得内心平静与真实掌控感"] end ``` ### [05:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=311s) 掌握冲突沟通后的终极收益：“言论成本”与无需自证的自由 当 Steven 追问“如果一个人在冲突处理上从零蜕变成为大师，其整个人生轨迹会发生多大变化”时，Fisher 强调其带来的正面影响是全方位的。首先是彻底摆脱低效沉默的隐形代价。很多人误以为不说话没有任何成本，但实际上“沟通始终有其代价（The bill always comes due）”。在亲密关系中隐忍不语，消耗的是自身的价值感；在职场中对关键诉求避而不谈，付出的可能就是职业晋升的代价。每一次该表达而选择退缩的瞬间，都如同一张在餐厅消费后累积的账单，最终都必须由自己的人生买单。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 表达成本与收益对比 accDescr: 展示选择压抑沉默与选择掌控表达带来的不同人生结果 subgraph CostOfSilence["隐忍与退缩的隐形代价"] S1["该说却不敢说"] --> S2["自我价值感被侵蚀"] S2 --> S3["错失职场机会与关系断层"] end subgraph GainOfControl["掌握表达的自我增值"] C1["自信可控地表达"] --> C2["确立心理边界"] C2 --> C3["获得情绪独立与人生掌控权"] end ``` 更深维度的收益，在于彻底打破“争当正确者”的心理魔咒。Fisher 提出金句："being right is overrated"（争对错是极其被高估的）。现代人深陷社交媒体制造的“观点制造机”陷阱，总觉得对每件事都必须表态。但实际上： - 哪怕别人宣称天空是紫色的，你大可以微笑着由他去，这不会动摇你内心的任何内核； - 你不需要认同对方，就能尝试理解对方（"I don't need to agree with you to understand you"）； - 面对别人的挑衅或快节奏追问，你有权完全保持沉默，或以极慢的语速回应。 掌控对话并不意味着声嘶力竭的反击，而是意识到自己拥有“不接招”的绝对自主权（autonomy）。 ### [07:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=450s) 所谓的“正义感”与情绪背负：学会选择值得起座的目标 针对 Fisher 的观点，Steven 提出了犀利的质疑：如果一个人遭遇了不公、被歪曲或者在社交媒体上被恶评，人类与生俱来的“正义感（sense of justice）”和纠偏冲动该往何处安放？Fisher 承认，正义与公平对许多人而言是极为珍贵的核心价值，但他抛出了一个灵魂拷问：“问题在于，你打算背着这种愤怒的情绪背负多久？”（How long do you want to carry that feeling?） Fisher 澄清道，克制绝不是鼓励大家当委曲求全的“受气包”或“局外旁观者（wallflower）”。他的核心法则是：你可以说出必须说的话，但前提是你在有条理、有克制地表达，传达出“我说出这些是因为客观上有表达的必要，而不是受情绪驱使非发泄不可”。此外，你还必须评估时机和听众——如果对方根本没有倾听的意愿，你的任何正义陈词都只是徒劳。Fisher 给出了一个生动而坚定的处事原则：想要学会为自己挺身而出，首先必须看清究竟谁才值得你“离开椅子站起来（who's worth getting out of your chair for）”。在无数场景中，加害者随口扔下一句刻薄的话便毫不在意地走开，受害者却为此背负精神枷锁整整二十年，这种为了所谓的纠偏而自我折磨，是生活中最具毁灭性的负重。 ### [09:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=568s) 掌握对话控制权：成为沟通中的“锚” 面对在权力结构或社交阶层中比自己地位更高的人（如公司上级、社交圈中的核心人物）持续的打压，或是亲密关系中的摩擦，具备沟通掌控力的人与失控的人有着鲜明对比。Steven Bartlett 留意到 Jefferson Fisher 说话时总是呈现出一种极度从容、内敛且受控的状态，并询问其背后的刻意设计。 Jefferson Fisher 直言，他的核心目标是“让你匹配我的节奏，让你进入我的频道”（"match my rhythm... come to my frequency"）。许多人在受到冒犯或挑战时常犯的错误，就是立刻把情绪反应拉满到极致（飙到“11度”）。剧烈的情绪爆发并不能证明自身的坚定与自信，反而对外释放出一种危险信号：你已经手忙脚乱、缺乏主心骨，甚至变得不可信任。一旦情绪失控，听众只会认定“你只是在闹情绪”，从而直接剥夺你所陈述事实的公信力。因此，在需要谈论沉重或困难的话题时，Fisher 会特意放慢语速、压低音量，将对方从激化的高压对抗中“拉回低处”。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 对话节奏控制逻辑 accDescr: 展示剧烈情绪爆发与降低语速音量在对话中产生的两种截然相反的沟通效果。 subgraph EmotionOutburst["情绪爆发模式（反面）"] A["情绪反应直接拉满（飙到 11 级）"] --> B["显得手足无措、失去控制"] B --> C["外界将其视为'只是在闹情绪'"] C --> D["丧失陈述事实的公信力与信任"] end subgraph AnchorMode["降速控场模式（正面：成为'锚'）"] E["特意放慢语速并降低音量"] --> F["将对方拉入自己的平稳节奏"] F --> G["传递从容不迫、临危不乱的确定感"] G --> H["成为全场依赖的沟通之锚"] end ``` 这种做法的本质是成为对话中的“锚”（anchor）： - **临危不乱的舒适感**：当向伴侣或职场上位者表达观点时，展现出不为变故所扰、无需慌忙敷衍的姿态，会赋予对方一种稳定的心理舒适感。 - **会议中话少的人往往最具权威**：在职场会议中，大家真正倾听的往往是扮演“锚”的人——他们通常言简意赅，把精力放在细致观察与倾听上，绝非四处指点江山、兜售建议的人。 - **避免激发逆反心理**：一旦有人用“你知道我觉得你应该怎么做……”开场，对方通常打心底里抗拒执行，因为这种强行兜售剥夺了对方的自主权；正如直接下令“你不能那么做”时，人类下意识的第一反应永远是“我偏要”。 --- ### [12:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=721s) 庭审中的非语言博弈：“这是我的客厅，其他人只是访客” 当被问及在法官与陪审团面前如何运用肢体语言和眼神来传递信服力时，Jefferson Fisher 揭示了一套极具心理暗示的现场控场法——“带着‘老马识途’的气场走进房间”（"Walk into a room like you've been there before"）。 Fisher 分享了他在开庭前的固定仪式：趁法官、陪审团和听众尚未入场前独自步入法庭，在心中默念“这是我的客厅，大家不过是来串门的访客”。他会在空旷的法庭里四处踱步，抚摸座椅扶手、触碰栏杆，彻底用自己的存在感填满这片物理空间。这种先入为主的熟悉感和自洽感，能在陪审团踏入法庭的瞬间发挥镇场作用，让陪审员感到踏实，并在潜意识中迅速建立“这个人值得信赖、靠谱且专业”的心理锚定。在法庭辩护中，说服的核心终究是“可信度”（credibility）的较量。 这种非语言沟通的胜负手在关键细节中尤为明显： - **将法官的驳回转化为“尽在掌握”的姿态**：法庭上法官做出不利裁决是家常便饭。许多律师会当场叹气、翻白眼或流露沮丧，而陪审团会瞬间解读为“糟了，刚才那条信息他们不想让我们知道，对他们案子不利”。Fisher 则反其道而行之，无论裁决多么不利，都会平静以对，甚至神情自若地致谢“谢谢法官”，表现得仿佛一切本就在计划之中，绝不露出落败之态。 - **靠近法官席（Sidebar）后的体态信号**：法官要求双方律师上前密谈并启动降噪装置时，陪审团虽然听不到讨论内容，但会紧盯律师退回席位时的肢体语言。垂头丧气就等于自曝其短。 - **克制反对的次数**：Fisher 给自己定下一条铁律——整场庭审原则上“只提出一次真正关键的反对”。对陪审团而言，律师频繁喊反对就等于在拼命隐瞒证据；唯有不过度反应、不搞防御性抗议，才能在陪审团面前牢固树立胸有成竹、光明磊落的专业威信。 --- ### [15:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=929s) “在拍子上”的现场气场与空间破局法 非语言沟通的核心在于戒除因个人虚荣心（ego）引发的应激本能，始终将视角锚定在目标任务上。Fisher 举例，在交叉质询敌意证人时，若对方说出与手中证据相悖的证词，业余律师往往会急赤白脸地翻找文件质问：“你确定吗？我这里白纸黑字写着……”而老练的律师只需把手从容按在文件上，抬眼沉声问一句：“你确定？”这一停顿便足以牢牢抓住在场所有人的注意力。 Fisher 将这种自信且自控的状态形容为爵士乐队术语“在拍子上”（in the pocket）： - **不争不抢，自有节奏**：既不过分前倾施压，也不退缩防守，而是像爵士乐手一样稳稳踩在节拍的正中央。 - **所谓气场（Aura）的本质**：无需借由语速过快或强势姿态来证明自己，而是“最真实的自我节奏就是最正确的时机”（"the right timing is my timing"）。以“我来过这里，让我为你引路”的姿态行事，自会散发出让人愿意跟随的天然领导力。 对于普通人面临的重要商务会议或约会，这一原则同样具有立竿见影的实战价值： - **提前踩点化解环境焦虑**：在关键日程前提早抵达现场，摸清洗手间位置、熟悉物理环境、提前调试 PPT 投影与设备连接，避免因现场手忙脚乱而破坏心理防线。 - **与幕后及现场人员建立人际触点**：Fisher 透露，就像他最近在圣巴巴拉（Santa Barbara）演讲一样，他一定会提前进入会场，观察场地全貌，走向音响视听（AV）团队握手寒暄，并在正式开场前主动走入听众席聊天、记住几个观众的名字。这种在正式沟通前“占领空间、建立联结”的微小习惯，能彻底消解临场紧绷感，从而在真正开口时稳居控场地位。 ### [18:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=1126s) 掌控空间的秘诀：提前熟悉环境与放下手机 在人际互动中，消除紧张最自然的方法就是主动建立连接。提前到达现场，了解在场每一个人的名字，询问他们来到这里的原因，并真诚地表达谢意：“非常感谢你们今天能来，我很期待接下来的分享，也很期待能和大家聊聊。”当一个人能够主动走过去与他人产生真实的接触时，那种氛围感与完全“冷启动”走进一间陌生房间是截然不同的。进入一个毫无感知的冷场，人会本能地感到局促。因此，提前踩点、早到餐厅去感受整个空间是极好的习惯；如果能彻底把手机留在外面不带进去，效果还会加倍。这种准备让人产生一种从容的心理底气——“我早就熟悉这里了，现在欢迎你来到我的主场”。 --- ### [19:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=1159s) 气场的本质：一种源自平静与自洽的频率 当史蒂文问及在职业生涯与生活中所见过的那些拥有强大“气场”（Aura）的人到底具备什么特质时，杰斐逊给出的核心定义是“一种平静的频率”（a frequency of peace）。真正拥有气场的人，往往会让人联想起生命中那些相处起来最舒适、最能让人卸下全副防备去做自己的人。 杰斐逊回忆起自己祖父母的家：只要一迈进门槛，就会有一种“时间仿佛静止了”的宁静感，祖父母只是全心全意地想了解他的近况，关心他过得好不好。许多看似浑身散发着光芒与气场的人，本质上是因为他们“根本不需要向任何人证明什么”。这种由内而外的魅力并非刻意伪装，而是完全源自对自身身份与能力的笃定与安全感。 --- ### [20:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=1226s) 不安全感与真气场：从德州牛仔智慧到女儿的豹纹短裙 气场的反面本质上是不安全感（insecurity）。缺乏内在安全感的人，往往迫切希望将自己“依附”在他人身上，急不可耐地展现熟络、疯狂提大人物的名字（name-dropping）、炫耀自己多有钱，试图成为除自己之外任何别人想要的样子。相反，真正真实、有气场的人深知自己当下的状态就足够好，面对外界的催促从容不迫：“你想赶时间？可我真的一点都不急，今天能办成什么就办成什么，这事真的非得今天交吗？如果必须推迟到明天又何妨？” 杰斐逊提到自己来自得克萨斯州，骨子里深受南方“牛仔智慧”（cowboy wisdom）的影响——深信属于自己的时机在该来的时候自然会来，根本无须强求。 他以自己6岁的女儿为例，生动地诠释了这种不受外界评价动摇的状态：家里曾试图帮女儿搭配好出门的衣服，但小姑娘根本不买账，常常自己挑一件豹纹芭蕾短裙（leopard print tutu），戴上一副墨镜就大摇大摆地下楼，笃定地觉得自己是全世界最酷、最时髦的存在。杰斐逊直言自己永远不想剥夺女儿身上这股劲头。那些真正拥有风格和气场的人，从来不在乎世俗的社交审美标准，因为他们根本不在意别人怎么看。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 真正气场与不安全感的对比 accDescr: 展现平静自洽的真实气场与外求证明的不安全感之间的心态差异 subgraph Aura["真正气场 (Authentic Aura)"] A1["内心平静与安全感"] --> A2["无需向任何人证明"] A2 --> A3["掌控自我节奏与独特风格"] end subgraph Insecurity["虚假气场 (Insecurity)"] B1["内在匮乏与焦虑"] --> B2["疯狂证明、炫耀人脉与财富"] B2 --> B3["迎合外界评价，迷失自我"] end ``` --- ### [22:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=1348s) 识破煤气灯效应：谎言与篡改现实的本质区别 在讨论新书出版后最受读者关注的内容时，杰斐逊指出，关于“如何应对艰难对话”以及“如何对付难缠之人”的章节引发了极其广泛的共鸣。在这个背景下，社会上被频繁讨论甚至过度滥用的词汇便是“煤气灯效应”（Gaslighting）。心理学上将其定义为一种蓄意的心理操控：一人通过撒谎或操纵，使另一人怀疑自己的现实认知、记忆或理智。 杰斐逊剖析了普通谎言与煤气灯效应的根本差异： * **普通谎言（Lying）**：停留在表面事实的歪曲。例如桌上明明是一个银色杯子，却非说是红色杯子。 * **煤气灯效应（Gaslighting）**：核心在于篡改对方的现实感知。操控者试图将受害者的现实强行替换为自己的版本，让受害者怀疑自我感知乃至外部评价，陷入“难道是我疯了吗？是我太敏感了吗？”的自我怀疑中。 杰斐逊坦承，其实每个人在潜意识里都曾扮演过煤气灯操纵者。出于自我防御和自我保护的本能，当人们不敢坦白自己生活中发生的不堪或过错时，往往会通过误导他人来掩盖真相，试图改变对方眼中的现实。 --- ### [24:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=1465s) 日常关系中的微型操纵与心理学热词的滥用 杰斐逊给出了一个极具生活质感的经典场景：伴侣俩刚参加完晚宴回家，其中一方由于白天积攒了压力或想掩盖某些问题，突然借题发挥，严厉批评伴侣在餐桌上分享的一个故事：“你当时为什么要说那句话？”当伴侣回答“我觉得大家都挺开心的，没问题啊”时，操纵者便开始发动攻势：“没问题？怎么可能没问题！你没看见当时大家的反应吗？我知道你不想听，但大家都觉得你有点太过了（a little bit much）。” 短短几句话，便彻底击碎并重构了对方那一刻的自信与现实认知。杰斐逊强调，这种裂痕一旦产生，必须经历深度的关系修复才能重回“全然坦诚”（radical honesty）的对话。 与这种操纵相伴而生的，是大众对流行心理学词汇的武器化与防御性滥用： - 当听到不爱听的批评时，立刻扣上帽子：“你在对我进行煤气灯操控！” - 当自己的言行伤害了他人被指出时，轻描淡写地推脱：“这是我的个人边界（boundary）。” - 谈及过往感情时，几乎人人都在宣称：“我刚摆脱了一个自恋狂（narcissistic）前任。” 这些心理学标签变成了极佳的自我保护盾牌，把所有错误归咎于他人，以此逃避审视自身问题的责任。 --- ### [26:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=1602s) 破除煤气灯操纵：放慢语速与坚定锚定自我现实 史蒂文指出，听众往往急于学会如何识别他人施加的煤气灯效应，却经常回避自己同样可能是操纵者这一事实。杰斐逊解释了停止对他人进行煤气灯操纵的至关重要性：每一次操纵，都是在将自己从最深处的情感真相与真实关系中推离，是在剥夺对方的真实感知，从而无情地侵蚀彼此的信任与对方的自我价值感。 而面对可能降临在自己身上的煤气灯操纵，最关键的破局诀窍就是**放慢对话节奏（slowing down the conversation）**并保持不动如山： 当对方抛出一句试图让你产生自我怀疑的话时，绝不要陷入脑内风暴跟着对方的节奏手忙脚乱地自证清白或试图解释修正。此时最强有力的回应只有极其简单的一句话： > “史蒂文，我的记忆可不是这样的。”（"Steven, I remember that differently."） 说完这句话后，彻底停顿留白。任凭对方再使出什么招数，只需坚守自己的现实基准，持续冷静地重复这一立场，绝不让对方轻易撬动属于你自己的真实。 ### [28:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=1729s) 表达主观认知与煤气灯效应的区别：意图与叙事掌控 在人际沟通与冲突中，人们往往很难厘清“单纯陈述个人对现实的感知”与“煤气灯操纵（Gaslighting）”之间的界限。史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）坦言，回顾以往在亲密关系中被逼入绝境、背水一战的激烈争吵，他甚至怀疑自己是否也曾在无意中对他人施加过煤气灯操纵。他提出了一个核心疑问：如果一个人只是在派对后对伴侣说“你刚才说了那句话，我看到对方翻白眼走开了，我认为你冒犯了他”，这究竟是说出自己的真实感知，还是在实施精神控制？杰斐逊·费舍尔（Jefferson Fisher）给出的定性标准非常清晰——根本区别在于“意图（Intention）”。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 煤气灯操纵的核心动机模型 accDescr: 展示操纵者如何通过控制叙事将虚构转化为受害者认同的事实 subgraph ManipulationGoal ["操纵者的终极意图：绝对控制"] A["自我中心意识<br/>'我是唯一的主角'"] --> B["掌控叙事角色<br/>身兼导演、制片与演员"] end subgraph Execution ["现实扭曲机制"] B --> C["强加行为与信念<br/>'你必须这样想、这样做'"] C --> D["认知重构<br/>虚构被扭曲成双方的'事实'"] end ``` 煤气灯操纵者的根本目的永远是争夺控制权：“掌控局面的人是我，而不是你。”操纵者试图成为自己这部电影中集导演、制片人和主演于一身的人，为了服务个人意图，强制要求对方按照其编写的剧本来行动与思考。更可怕的是，这种对现实的篡改一旦深入，不仅受害者会信以为真，甚至技术高超的撒谎者连自己都能彻底欺骗，将谎言内化为不容置疑的事实。真正的抵御方式，正如费舍尔所言，在于“站在你所知的真相之中”，而不是交出缰绳被他人牵着鼻子走。 ### [30:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=1847s) 谁最容易被操控？依恋类型与共调节需求 当探讨哪类人群最容易沦为煤气灯操纵的受害者时，费舍尔指出，焦虑型依恋人格（Anxious Attachment）以及无法独立进行情绪自我调节的人最容易中招。这类人往往极度依赖“情绪共调节（Co-regulation）”机制。费舍尔从自身的观察和读者反馈出发，分析了男女在应对压力时的常见差异：许多男性倾向于通过独处、散步一小时或给自己一个安静的夜晚来完成“自我调节（Self-regulate）”；而许多女性则更习惯通过彼此的互动来寻求安抚，如果对方状态不佳，她们自己也无法安定，陷入“你不好，我就不好（I'm not okay if you're not okay）”的循环中。 这种对他人情绪反馈的高度敏感和不安全感，使得焦虑型依恋者在面对质疑时会频繁追问“你还好吗？你确定没事吗？”，进而极易将对局面的评判权拱手让给对方。相比回避型依恋或内心笃定的人，缺乏自立调节能力、长期处于焦虑和不安全感中的人，最容易被操纵者牵着情绪走，落入被全盘否定的心理陷阱。 ### [33:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=1990s) 职场与关系中的性别差异与偏见数据 巴特利特援引了一系列关于异性亲密关系和职场环境的研究数据，印证了女性在现实中承受更高比例煤气灯操纵的现状。在职场与社会生活中，女性的专业能力更频繁遭到质疑，记忆常被怀疑，经历也更容易被轻描淡写地打发；在男性主导的行业以及有色人种女性群体中，这种现象尤为严重。甚至在医疗场景下，女性的疼痛感受也常被低估，导致心脏病、自身免疫性疾病、ADHD 及自闭症等病症的诊断往往大幅滞后。 巴特利特结合自己过去十年雇佣数千名员工的管理经历表示，虽然他并非女性、无法亲历其境，但他亲眼目睹过一些男性高管无缘无故贬低、轻视同级别女性高管，仅仅因为对方是女性就不给予应有的认可与信任。费舍尔赞同这一观察，并指出虽然所有人在无意识中都可能偶尔使用过操纵手段，但在他接触的海量读者和社群反馈中，前来倾诉自己“正在被煤气灯操纵”的清一色全是女性，从来没有任何一个男性这样向他求助。然而有趣的是，当话题转向“自恋狂（Narcissist）”时，男性也会主动开口——他们通常会抱怨自己的妻子或前任是自恋狂，却绝不会认为自己是被操纵的受害者。 ### [37:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=2220s) 职场遭遇自恋狂与操控者的生存法则：“赞美或挑衅”的游戏 针对在职场中长期面对自恋狂上司或频繁遭遇煤气灯操纵的员工，费舍尔给出了现实且极具防御性的策略。首要选项甚至包括“辞职”，这取决于个人的终极职业目标与权衡；但如果必须留在原地，核心防御原则就是主动削减接触面并打破对方的心理游戏规则。 - **物理与沟通脱敏**：最大限度限制互动频率和肢体接触。哪怕工位仅隔三扇门，也要清醒认识到彼此不是朋友，减少非必要的语言往来。 - **使用中立陈述（Neutral Statements）**：克制情绪反应，少说话，只陈述不带感情色彩的事实，切断操纵者借题发挥的可能。 - **识破“赞美或挑衅（Praise or Provoke）”的本质**：自恋狂在人际交往中玩的是双向控制游戏。当你没有为他们送上源源不断的赞美与崇拜时，他们就会迅速切换到挑衅模式，故意制造争端和挫败感。 - **切断控制满足感**：自恋狂从他人的愤怒、挫败中获得的控制快感，丝毫不亚于从谄媚赞美中获得的满足。识破这一点后，唯有保持情绪冷淡，才能让其无法从你身上榨取控制欲。 费舍尔补充道，他在法庭上见过太多从不认错、毫无共情能力的专家证人，都是典型的自恋特征体现。虽然每个人身上多少都有一定的自恋倾向，但一旦需要在日常工作中与重度自恋者周旋，唯有看清对方的博弈手段、主动设立心理屏障，才能守住自己的心智与边界。 ### [38:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=2324s) 应对操纵者的三大策略：中立回应与不入局 在识破对方的操纵套路后，最关键的一步是明确自己绝不参与这场心理游戏。Jefferson Fisher 指出，面对这种对话陷阱，应对机制可以分为清晰的三步：第一，意识到自己根本没有必要向对方解释或争辩任何事；第二，主动拉开与他们的心理和物理距离；第三，始终使用完全中立、毫无情绪抓手的语言回应。 类似“知道了（That's good to know）”、“谢谢你的分享（Thanks for sharing）”或“已记录（Noted）”这类回应，能够彻底切断对话的摩擦力。这类中性词句让操纵者根本无从借题发挥，他们找不到可以借力抓取的话柄，原本试图挑起争端的对话便会自然熄火。 ### [39:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=2346s) 操纵者与自恋者的三大核心特质 当被问及如何辨别身边企图操纵或进行煤气灯效应（Gaslighting）的人时，Jefferson Fisher 归纳了自恋型人格与操纵者的三个标志性特征： 1. **永远无法为他人感到高兴**：他们只能为自己开心，绝不可能发自内心地祝贺别人。如果有人兴奋地分享“你看到 Steven 刚获奖了吗？这太棒了”，他们最多敷衍一句“哦，我觉得还行吧”，紧接着就会立刻将话题强行拐回自己身上——“你还记得我当年做成那件事的时候吗……”。 2. **根深蒂固的受害者心态（Victim Mentality）**：他们总能找到角度抱怨这个世界对他们有多不公、命运有多悲惨。在他们口中，自己明明同样配得上成功，甚至付出了更多，但“社会都在针对我”、“我做了一切却根本没人在意、没人倾听”。在他们眼里，世间发生的所有倒霉事都是外部强加给他们的。 3. **极度缺乏共情，且极度痴迷于外界的人设假象**：他们无法体会他人的真实情感，情感对他们而言只是表演工具。他们对“外界如何看待自己”异常敏感脆弱，往往会在不同人面前展现完全割裂的双面形象。在亲密关系中，关起门来的私下相处可能极为糟糕破裂，但在公众面前，自恋者会精心营造出婚姻无比完美的假象，让外人纷纷惊呼“能和这种人结婚你简直太幸福了”，而真正身处其中的受害者只能在孤立无援中感到无比绝望。 ### [40:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=2448s) 法庭上的自恋专家证人与“陪审团测试” 作为一名出庭律师，Jefferson Fisher 在职业生涯中经常直面自恋型人格。在法庭上，最典型的代表莫过于某些专家证人。这类人自视甚高，认为自己的专业意见是绝对真理、不容置疑；面对不同观点的证人，他们往往表现得极其居高临下，用傲慢的眼神和语气向质疑者传达一种“你怎么会蠢到敢来挑战我”的轻蔑态度。这类人在人群中通常也比普通人话多得多，极具表达和掌控欲。 对付这种从不退让半步、完全无法理性沟通的自恋者，Jefferson Fisher 在法庭宣誓质询（Deposition）中有一套屡试不爽的杀手锏。他不会正面辩驳其观点的漏洞，而是直接把焦点转向外部评价： > “你觉得陪审团听到这个会买账吗？”或者“你认为其他人会同意你的说法吗？” 这句话仿佛拥有瞬间解除武装的魔力。自恋者的傲慢态度会立刻发生戏剧性的转变，迅速调整言辞，以便迎合潜在观众的喜好。Jefferson Fisher 解释道，自恋者的整个世界都建立在“外界对我的看法”这一支柱之上，他们极度渴望被众人崇拜、渴望自己的想法被奉为全场最佳。为了维持人见人爱的假象，他们会像变色龙一样瞬间见风使舵，哪怕在两小时的质询中一直死咬着强硬立场不放，只要被提及“公众会如何看待”，他们就会迅速软化态度，说出更符合大众口味的言论。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 瓦解自恋者傲慢的法庭质询机制 accDescr: 展示自恋型专家证人如何从固执己见在外界评价的干预下转变为妥协迎合。 subgraph S1["自恋者的初始防御机制"] A["固执自傲的绝对观点"] --> B["居高临下：鄙视一切质疑者"] end subgraph S2["律师的心理切入点"] B --> C{"引入外部感知审视<br/>'你觉得陪审团会接受吗？'"} end subgraph S3["变色龙式妥协"] C --> D["极度恐惧公众形象受损"] D --> E["迅速软化立场，改变言论以迎合外界"] end ``` ### [42:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=2568s) 自卑与自恋的一线之隔：对成长的渴求 针对自恋者总爱把话题引向自己的现象，主持人 Steven 提出了一个深刻的问题：日常生活中许多人在听到别人的好消息时，第一反应也是提自己的类似经历，这究竟是自恋，还是仅仅源于内心极度缺乏安全感、渴望得到外界认可？极度自卑与自恋之间究竟有没有明确的分界线？ Jefferson Fisher 给出了极其精辟的论断：“并非所有自卑缺乏安全感的人都是自恋者，但所有自恋者都极度缺乏安全感。” 两者最根本的界限，在于是否具备**“对成长的渴求（Interest for growth）”**： - **内心自卑、缺乏安全感的人**：他们渴望建立真实的依恋关系，会积极寻找成长的路径，希望通过自我提升来获得确定感与安全感。 - **纯粹的自恋者**：他们完全没有依附他人或真实连接的意愿，周围的人对他们而言只是用于取悦自己、为自己提供崇拜与支持的工具。最重要的是，自恋者对“个人成长”毫无兴趣——在他们坚固的自我妄想中，自己早已掌握了一切真理，自己就是最完美的存在，根本不需要任何改变或精进。 ### [44:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=2650s) 拒绝接招：如何彻底击碎自恋者的心理圈套 Jefferson Fisher 总结自己无论在生活还是法庭上面对自恋者从不中招的秘诀，只有极其关键的一句话：“我绝不追逐他们的字眼（I don't chase their words）。” 在日常沟通中，绝大多数人面对自恋者或煤气灯操纵者时犯下的最大错误，就是陷入了“填坑陷阱”。这种动态可以用挖坑来形容： - 操纵者故意抛出一句极具挑衅性、歪曲事实或令人抓狂的话（挖了一个坑）。 - 对方瞬间情绪上头，急于辩解：“不，事情根本不是你说的那样！难道你忘了吗？”（跳进坑里拼命填土）。 - 看到你在追着他的话解释，操纵者马上反手挖出下一个更大的坑。 - 最终，你筋疲力尽、心力交瘁，因为整场对话中你都在被动地到处堵漏洞，根本无法进行任何真正有意义的沟通。 Fisher 的做法是：当场“放下铁锹”，静静站在原地，看着对方挖坑而不去填。他只会给出一个极其平淡的中性信号，比如一句毫无波澜的“收到（Got it）”。自恋者依赖受害者的情绪反馈来维持心理游戏，一旦他们发现无论怎么激惹你都纹丝不动、绝不入局，他们就会立刻感到无趣，并在几分钟内转身去寻找下一个更容易摆布的猎物。 ### [45:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=2746s) 情绪定力：查拉曼与戴姆·达什的对话对决 Steven 分享了著名电台节目《The Breakfast Club》中主持人 Charlamagne tha God 采访音乐界知名人物 Dame Dash 的经典一幕。当时 Dame Dash 刚申请破产，而 Charlamagne 在采访中以极度松弛放松的状态，时不时轻描淡写地指出 Dame 已经破产的事实。 这一举动让心高气傲的 Dame Dash 瞬间情绪失控、暴跳如雷。Dame 在节目中极力抬高自己，拼命证明自己没有破产，甚至对 Charlamagne 进行极其难听的人身攻击。然而，面对铺天盖地的愤怒与侮辱，Charlamagne 的情绪状态、音量大小、眼神仪态和肢体语言自始至终没有发生哪怕一丝一毫的变化，表现得“完全不受影响（Unbothered）”。 这种极致的定力反而让攻击者彻底抓狂。Dame 发现无论自己如何提高音量、使用更具冒犯性的词汇，都无法激怒对方分毫。Steven 指出，这完全印证了 Fisher 所说的沟通逻辑：操纵者或自大狂总想把你推向他们设定的冲突战场，如果始终稳稳扎根在自己的立场与状态中、拒绝随之起舞，对方精心编织的攻势就会沦为一场滑稽的独角戏。 随后 Jefferson Fisher 顺着这个思路回忆起自己的父亲。童年时他坐在副驾驶上，经常会遇到后方车辆紧贴车尾、极具攻击性地危险跟车（Tailgating）。每当年幼的 Fisher 看着后视镜开始替父亲感到紧张焦虑时，在得克萨斯州宽阔的公路上，父亲的做法却极其冷静，他既不会赌气加速，也不会愤怒反制，而是自有一套独特的处理方式。 ### [47:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=2872s) 保持不被激怒的心态：“开着你的破车走吧” Jefferson Fisher 回忆起他父亲开车时的一个经典场景。路上很多人常常会遭遇路怒症（road rage），开着车对着窗外其他车辆大喊大叫、怒火中烧。但他父亲被别人紧逼或挑衅时，从不发火，而是慢悠悠地把车开到路肩上让对方先过，看着后视镜雷打不动地说上一句：“开着你的破车去耍帅吧，随你去（Go on with your bad self）。”这种全然不受打扰（unbothered）的态度给 Jefferson 留下了极其深刻的印记。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 应对外界挑衅的心态模式 accDescr: 对比路怒对撞与自主辨识两种面对外界挑衅时的不同心理机制 subgraph Reactive["被动对抗模式"] A["外界挑衅 / 强行超车 / 恶意指责"] --> B["情绪被点燃：路怒或反驳"] B --> C["被拉入对方设定的节奏与轨道"] end subgraph Discerning["自主从容模式"] D["认清自我价值与所在轨道"] --> E["主动让开路肩 / 微笑置之"] E --> F["内心明澈：不受他人情绪与节奏绑架"] end ``` 这种不受干扰的状态，绝非源于“不在乎”或麻木不仁，而是一种基于清醒认知的**洞察力（discernment）**。Jefferson 指出，一个人深知“我的价值和尊严绝不取决于你想让我走向何方”。就像有人跑来硬说“天空是紫色的”，你完全可以说“你高兴就好”，根本无需去争论对错。每个人都知道自己的车道和速度，不必强行去迎合别人的节奏。 - **行车哲学的本质**：清楚自己的定位与速度，就不会被后方鸣笛的狂躁司机打乱阵脚。 - **不被激怒的真谛**：并非冷漠无感，而是清楚在当下“我是谁”，因而没有任何必要变成他人期待或激怒下的模样。 --- ### [49:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=2942s) 旁观者视角的心理学：你的反应决定了真相 Steven Bartlett 提到，要是每个人都能做到“免受激怒（untriggerable）”，整个世界都会平静许多。他以当天早晨看到的一段访谈为例：Dame Dash 对著名主持人 Charlamagne tha God 进行了极其冒犯的辱骂。作为观众，Steven 的本能反应是立刻盯住 Charlamagne 的表情和动作，试图通过受害者的反应来判断指控究竟是不是真的。结果 Charlamagne 只是哈哈一笑，毫不在意，就像水从鸭子背上滑过一样（water off a duck's back）。这让观众立刻得出结论：“那肯定不是真的，因为当事人根本不在乎。” Jefferson 深表赞同，并举了一个绝妙的例子来阐述这一沟通心理学定律： > “如果我现在对你说：‘Steven，我恨透你身上那件紫色衬衫了，那是我见过最难看的一件衣服！’这话会对你产生任何伤害吗？完全不会——因为你根本没有穿紫色衬衫。” 人们内心的底气就像一套无形的铠甲，不仅包含了身上穿的衣服，更包含了自信、信仰以及成长过程中被赋予的一切支持。如果有人污蔑你穿了紫色衬衫，跳起来激烈争辩“我没穿”反而显得荒谬。Jefferson 引用了亚伯拉罕·林肯的名言：“**永远不要和傻瓜争论，因为旁观者根本分不清谁是谁**（Never argue with a fool, because an onlooker can never know the difference）。” ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 旁观者对冲突反馈的判断路径 accDescr: 展示面对挑衅时，当事人激烈反驳与一笑置之对旁观者产生的相反效果 A["攻击者挑衅 / 侮辱"] --> B{"当事人反应"} B -- "气急败坏、激烈争论" --> C["旁观者怀疑：被戳中痛处，可能是真的"] B -- "一笑置之、冷静反问" --> D["旁观者判断：纯属无稽之谈，攻击者自讨没趣"] ``` - **反击霸凌的最佳武器**：面对故意羞辱你的人，最致命的反应就是笑一笑，或者平静地反问一句：“你这么说，是为了让我难堪吗？”这会让霸凌者瞬间发现“欺负你毫无乐趣可言”，从而彻底丧失继续挑衅的动力。 - **反应定调事实**：在人际沟通与公共场域中，你的反应直接决定了旁观者如何解读眼前发生的一切。 --- ### [52:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=3121s) 沟通是一种纪律：坦诚自我状态以赢得信任 Steven 提出疑问：许多人非常容易被激怒、时刻追求所谓的“伸张正义”，走向从容与通透是一项需要日积月累锻炼的肌肉吗？Jefferson 明确指出，沟通是一门**严格的自律（discipline）**。人们愿意把时间和金钱花在健身、阅读成功学书籍、收听播客上，却很少有人系统性地投资自己的沟通能力。学校甚至法学院都不教这个——法学院教的是如何研读法条，却从不教如何研读人心。 在法庭与日常对话中，身体、激素与情绪状态直接影响沟通表现。如果睡眠不足、饥肠辘辘、满腹牢骚，硬撑着“完美形象”往往适得其反。Jefferson 分享了他在法庭上的实战做法：与其假装一切完美，不如直接向陪审团坦白：“大家早上好，我得向大家承认，我今天有点起床气，早上也没吃什么东西，状态不太好。现场还有谁跟我一样心情烦躁吗？”陪审员们纷纷点头，情感的共鸣瞬间建立。 - **完美无法引起共鸣，挣扎与脆弱才可以**：当别人问“你好吗”时，敷衍一句假惺惺的“挺好的”只会筑起心墙；而如实坦言“今天早上有些意外情况搞得我心力交瘁”，反而能立刻博得对方的信任。 - **区分“在做什么”与“感觉如何”**：Jefferson 提到他与妻子 Sarah 每天早晨送完孩子后会有 10 分钟的晨间交流。妻子经常提醒他一句话：“**你告诉我很多你在做的事（日程安排），但你压根没告诉我你的感觉如何。**”这是许多人（尤其是男性）习惯压抑情绪的通病。 --- ### [56:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=3380s) 两性之间的情绪波动差异 Steven 顺着这个话题分享了男女在情感表达上的显著差异。尽管避免以偏概全，但在普遍观念和生理机制（如周期性激素波动）的作用下，两性面对情绪的方式确实常常不在同一个波长上。 Steven 坦诚分享了自己的亲身经历：在与伴侣相处的 7 年时间里，女朋友可能见过他哭过一次（至多两次），但他却亲眼见过女朋友哭了不下 500 次。他坦言，有时真觉得男女之间就像“两个完全不同的物种”——自己和男性哥们之间的相处方式，与跟女友互动时的情感接收与表达波段，存在着天壤之别。这种差异需要伴侣之间付出巨大的理解与调适，而非单纯用逻辑去评判对错。 ### [57:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=3460s) 伴侣冲突中的情绪回应：以共情换取平静 在探讨两性沟通时，大众舆论往往聚焦于“男性需要展现更多情绪、做出改变”。对此，史蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）提出了对立面的疑问：女性是否也需要反思？双方是否应该在中间点相遇？难道男性必须变得情绪化，还是女性应该学得更加沉着克制？杰斐逊·费舍尔（Jefferson Fisher）给出了一个反直觉的洞见：“如果你能展现更多情绪，她自然就会变得更加沉着。”费舍尔在自己的婚姻中深刻体会到，当丈夫愿意表露情绪时，妻子的情绪往往会迅速平复下来。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 伴侣冲突中的情绪应对循环 accDescr: 对比冷漠压制与共情修复在冲突中带来的两种完全相反的关系走向 subgraph Negative["冷漠与推开（恶性循环）"] A1["女方产生情绪表达诉求"] --> B1["男方陷入静止/冷漠状态或轻蔑驳斥<br/>'这也太蠢了，偏偏选这时候？'"] B1 --> C1["女方感到被推远、未被听见"] C1 --> D1["情绪进一步升级、爆发更激烈争吵"] end subgraph Positive["共情与修复（良性循环）"] A2["女方产生情绪表达诉求"] --> B2["男方放下自身烦躁，同频共情<br/>'我理解你为什么会有这种感觉'"] B2 --> C2["女方确认安全感，情绪收缩平复"] C2 --> D2["达成快速修复，后续可平静坚守原则"] end ``` 巴特利特半开玩笑地反问，这是否意味着自己需要大喊大叫或痛哭流涕。费舍尔澄清，展现情绪绝非发脾气或失控流泪，而是“与她一同置身于那种情绪之中”（being in it with her），用语言和态度让她真切感受到你的同频。许多男性在伴侣起情绪时会本能地开启“静止关机模式”（static mode）或出言轻蔑：“这太蠢了，非得挑现在说吗？”争吵往往发生在最不凑巧的时刻，但若在此时冷漠推开伴侣，只会迫使对方的情绪进一步升级失控。男性常常从小被灌输“男儿有泪不轻弹”的规训，正如巴特利特回忆自己的父亲在婚姻互动中要么极度罕见地大吼反击，要么就彻底陷入毫无感情的静止状态，缺乏健康的中间地带；因此许多男性即便口头承认沮丧或悔恨，也很难自如地将这些情感传达出来。 ### [01:00:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=3646s) 关系的破裂源于未修复的微小瞬间 费舍尔指出，亲密关系能否持久，关键全在于“修复”（repair）的速度与意愿。确认伴侣的情绪（Validation）绝非软弱，而是修复的核心工具。“在我的认知里，关系从来不是毁于某一次重大过失，而是瓦解于成百上千个本可以修复却被白白放弃的瞬间。”在那些微不足道的日常时刻里，人们本可以说一句“对不起”，却选择顽固保留；本可以认同对方的感受，却轻蔑地抛出一句“真无聊”。正是在这些微小裂痕中放弃修复，两人最终才会形同陌路。 在面临冲突的关口，男性需要克服本能的防御与静止，主动做出不同的选择：不要搬出惯常的说辞，不要急于证明对方的情绪是不理智的，而是给予最直接的情感确认： - “我能理解你为什么会有这种感受。” - “如果你是这么理解的，我完全不怪你会有这种情绪。” - “这听上去确实很吓人/很让人沮丧。” 这种做法要求沟通者暂时搁置自身的烦躁，用语言精准回应伴侣深层的核心渴求——被倾听、获得安全感、确信自己没有“小题大做”（not being too much）。一旦对方的情绪得到承接，双方的剑拔弩张便会立刻消退，男方自身的烦躁感也会随之烟消云散。倘若事后仍有未解的困扰，完全可以在平静的状态下提出探讨：“我能提一件你刚才说的话吗？那其实让我挺在意的。” ### [01:03:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=3793s) 告别“零和思维”：确认情绪不等于牺牲自主权 巴特利特提出了许多男性心中的深层顾虑：如果每次面对情绪都顺从迎合、一味退让以求息事宁人，是否会在未来树立极坏的先例？现实中许多男性因为从不据理力争，短期内图省事，长期却如同“置身牢笼”（living in a prison），彻底丧失了个人自主权与掌控力。巴特利特坦言这深受其父亲的影响——父亲因一味避让争吵而在二三十年里付出了沉重代价，这促使巴特利特在察觉到自己未来无法长期妥协的事情上，选择正面迎击冲突、死守底线：“因为如果我今天退让了，明天就会变成地狱。” 费舍尔指出，这种焦虑的本质是对丧失自主权、权利与控制力的恐惧；在濒临破裂的关系中，最常听到的词汇莫过于“像被关在笼子里”（caged）。这根源于一种“零和思维”（zero-sum thinking），误以为一旦认同对方的感受，自己就必须全盘妥协。费舍尔强调：“两者可以同时成立。”你完全可以百分之百确认并包容对方的感受，同时依然坚定地持有自己的事实与立场。 - **孩童隐喻**：正如年幼的孩子发脾气、哭闹或说“不”时，明智的父母不会愤怒反击，而是能看穿表象——“她只是饿了、累了或害怕了”；成人本质上也只是戴着成熟面具的大孩子，表面的情绪宣泄下往往隐藏着渴望被爱与被理解的根本需求。 - **划定界限的前提**：必须先满足情绪层面的连接，再建立基于理性的个人边界。 为了具体拆解如何在实践中平衡“情绪确认”与“守住底线”，巴特利特分享了自己的一段真实经历：当时他在亚洲，因英国的业务突发紧急状况而在床上看手机回消息，前女友随即提出强硬要求——今后在床上绝不允许碰手机。双方随即就这一生活边界展开了博弈。 ### [01:07:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=4039s) 卧室里的手机争执：把伴侣的舒适置于自己的不便之上 斯蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）分享了一个自己生活中的真实案例：他的伴侣曾提出要求，希望他不要把手机带进卧室使用。斯蒂芬在脑海中推演了各种场景后意识到，如果自己全盘接受并许下承诺，最终的结果只会是他躲在洗手间、淋浴间甚至干脆不回卧室睡觉，直到把事情处理完。他感到如果直接妥协，就是在为未来制造无法兑现的期望，最终反倒会让她失望，因此他当时选择坚守底线。杰弗森·费舍尔（Jefferson Fisher）随即引导他剖析伴侣提出这一要求背后的真实需求——斯蒂芬承认，伴侣的核心诉求其实是“情感联结”（connection），而他在卧室玩手机被解读成了疏离与断联；特别是在斯蒂芬工作极度繁忙的那周，手机只是伴侣表达“未被关注”这一情绪的具象抓手。 费舍尔指出，解决这种矛盾的核心心法不是全面投降，而是“把她的舒适置于你的不便之上”（putting her comfort over your inconvenience）。在亲密关系中，最糟糕的应对方式是开启防御反击：“你刚才不也在玩手机吗？你成天都在看手机，凭什么说我？”这种回击是在针对伴侣的“情绪反应”做辩驳，却完全忽略了底层需求。更成熟的做法是放慢节奏，直接切入核心联结：“我能理解这让你觉得我没有把注意力放在你身上，但我绝对不是想疏远你。手头有件事我必须处理完大脑才能放松，怎样才能既处理好这件事，又能兼顾我们的联结？”费舍尔甚至给出了更接地气的微小动作：在拿起手机前主动说明或询问，例如“格雷格（Greg）等下要发我一份演示文稿，我能花几分钟快速看一眼吗？”伴侣大概率会同意，因为这一句主动的报备本身就是在确认彼此的联结。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 应对亲密关系抱怨的两种路径 accDescr: 对比防御性反击与基于联结的沟通方式及其对情感账户的影响 subgraph Defense["错误路径：针对反应进行防御反击"] A["伴侣提出限制要求<br/>如：别在卧室玩手机"] --> B["防御反击：<br/>'你自己不也整天玩手机？'"] B --> C["争吵升级 / 情感账户持续透支"] end subgraph Connection["成熟路径：识别需求并置换舒适"] D["识别底层需求：<br/>伴侣感到疏离与断联"] --> E["确认联结 + 提前同步：<br/>'我需要处理一份文件，能看一眼吗？'"] E --> F["伴侣感受被尊重 / 情感账户增值"] end ``` - **情感账户法则**：如果一次次将自己的“怕麻烦”置于伴侣的“舒适感”之上，感情账户就会不断被透支；反之，哪怕只做一点微小而不便的调整去成全对方的舒适，关系便能长久维系。 - **消解逃避错觉**：明确向伴侣传达“我用手机处理杂务是为了清空大脑来好好陪你，而不是为了从你身边逃开”，能瞬间化解对方的被抛弃感。 --- ### [01:11:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=4307s) 滑坡谬误与边界感：有原则的妥协与软弱顺从的区别 斯蒂芬剖析了自己当时强烈抗拒妥协的深层心理机制：他坦言自己内心可能带有一点“心理阴影”（traumatized），因为他在生活中见过太多男性的自主权被伴侣步步蚕食，从退让第一步开始，最终沦落到毫无个人空间与话语权的被动境地。在潜意识里，这变成了一种滑坡推论——“如果我今天答应不在卧室看手机，明天你就会要求厨房不能看，后天就是卫生间不能看，直到我彻底丧失自由”。斯蒂芬反思，虽然客观上伴侣提出“卧室不看手机”完全合情合理，但他第一反应却是竖起防备、全力抵抗，甚至有时反击过度。 费舍尔对此表示高度共鸣，直言“很多男人都有过这种体会”。但他特别强调，建立健康的界限并不等于事事软弱顺从（rolling over）。如果一个男人对伴侣的所有要求都唯唯诺诺地回答“行，没问题”，彻底抹杀自己的喜好与原则，这种毫无骨气的被动姿态（passivity）在伴侣眼中其实是极具毁灭性且“极其缺乏吸引力”的。真正的力量在于拥有清晰的主见与意志力（strength of mind, strength of will）——既不死板地认为“只有我说了算”，又能在核心原则上明确表态：“不，这里是我的底线，我愿意为此坚守立场。”有原则的拒绝不仅不会破坏感情，反而是向伴侣传递成熟与力量的信号。 --- ### [01:13:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=4380s) 守护个人爱好与空间：为什么健康的亲密关系需要“自我充能” 关于如何平衡伴侣关系与个人自主权，两人深入探讨了维护个人兴趣与社交圈的重要性。斯蒂芬提到，许多男性都有专属于自己的爱好，例如和哥们儿看足球赛、在群聊里肆无忌惮地扯淡开玩笑，坚决捍卫这些看似无用的时间，反倒能维持自己在伴侣眼中的魅力。费舍尔完全赞同这一观点，并指出一个健康亲密关系的核心标志是：**即便伴侣觉得你的爱好很烦人、很古怪，甚至抱怨你把车库塞得满满当当，但只要看到这件事情能让你真正快乐，她就会为你感到高兴并全力支持**。 费舍尔道出了婚姻与生活的一大扎心真相：“婚姻本身是不够的，孩子是不够的，工作也是不够的。你必须拥有能完全属于你自己、能为你个人注入能量的事物。”无论是在湖边喂鸭子，还是去打一场高尔夫、来一次兄弟旅行，只有先把自己的能量槽填满，回归家庭时才能给予伴侣和孩子更高质量的爱。与此同时，两人也指出了病态关系的危险信号：有些控制欲极强的伴侣会处心积虑地切断对方所有的爱好与圈子，剥夺其自由与能动性（agency），直到群聊里的那个朋友彻底“查无此人”，彻底沦为失去自我的附属品。 - **父母的误区**：新手父母常陷入“必须时刻黏在孩子身边、绝不能离开半步”的自我消耗怪圈，而适度抽离去自我充能，反而能成为更好的父母与伴侣。 - **识别控制型关系**：若一段关系建立在系统性剥夺对方朋友群、爱好和独立空间的基础上，其本质是控制而非关爱。 ### [01:15:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=4528s) 设定底线：守护优先级与防止滑坡效应 对话从亲密关系中的束缚感切入。很多伴侣常抱怨对方管得太宽，感觉自己“被拴上了链子”（on a leash），连参加朋友聚会都不行。Jefferson Fisher 指出，这种现象本质上是因为未能尽早确立并强化个人边界。边界的妥协往往是一条危险的滑坡（slippery slope）：你做出了第一次退让，对方就会得寸进尺地索取下一次让步；不知不觉中，你就发现自己如同身陷囹圄、孤立无援，既沮丧又茫然不知自己为何沦落至此。 在 Jefferson Fisher 看来，确立边界的核心逻辑在于“我是否在保护最核心的优先级”（protecting the priority）。无论是在写作、演讲还是做播客，他都会首先确立什么才是不可撼动的核心——例如家庭与夫妻关系。如果双方确立周四晚上是专属的约会之夜（date night），那么这一天就绝对不可插入任何其他安排，遇到冲突一律坚定回绝。正是由于拥有这些毫不含糊的“坚决拒绝”（hard nos），安排其余生活与工作琐事时才会变得轻而易举。归根结底，这关乎一个人在边界问题上是坦荡真实，还是虚伪迎合。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 优先级保护与边界确立逻辑 accDescr: 展示如何通过定义最核心的优先级并确立不可动摇的界限，来抵御妥协滑坡效应。 subgraph Boundaries ["边界防护机制"] A["明确核心优先级<br/>(例如：家庭 / 婚姻约会之夜)"] --> B["确立不可动摇的底线<br/>(坚决说'不' / Hard Nos)"] B --> C["有效阻断'妥协滑坡'<br/>(防止一步退、步步退)"] B --> D["余下日常安排变得清晰高效"] end ``` --- ### [01:17:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=4628s) 讨好型人格：“友好”（Nice）与“善良”（Kind）的本质区别 谈及人际交往，主持人 Steven 问及“友好”（nice）与“善良”（kind）的区别以及人们应当追求哪一种。Jefferson Fisher 给出了直击痛点的回答：“切勿为了维持表面友好，而牺牲真实”（Stop being nice at the expense of being real）。人们从小被规训要“表现友好”（be nice），但如果将讨好他人当成人生信条，最终只会沦为它的奴隶。 - **友好（Nice）浮于表面**：它关注的是礼节、政治正确和表面客套。就像约会后被问及感受，如果评价对方“人挺好的”（She was nice），往往暗示索然无味。友好的人遇到问题不敢吐露真相，借口说“说出来不太礼貌”。 - **善良（Kind）直抵深处**：该词源自“亲族”（kin），追求深层联结与真诚。善良的人之所以直言不讳，是因为“我足够在乎你，所以愿意告诉你真相”。面对朋友不妥的决策，虚伪的友好会说“听起来棒极了”，而真正的善良会坦言：“我必须提醒你，这事感觉不太对劲。” 这种对“表面友好”的病态执念催生了海量的“讨好型人格”（people pleasers）。讨好者常常错把“他人的愉悦”当成“自我价值”的唯一来源。他们的潜意识在呐喊：“如果你对我感到不满，我就一文不值。”许多人甚至早在童年时期就为了挽救父母破裂的婚姻，强迫自己充当取悦所有人的角色，过早丧失了童真。这种讨好演变成一种求生本能（survival skill）。Jefferson Fisher 对此强调：“讨好别人并没有错，前提是你自己也必须是被讨好的那个人之一。” - 讨好者常陷入自我牺牲循环：为了迎合他人不断将自己置于极其不便的境地，渴求对方能看到自己的价值。 - 绝大多数人阅读其著作或观看视频，并非为了反思“上一场对话”，而是为了应对心中正焦虑不安的“下一场对话”（the next conversation）；社群内部调查显示，仅读完前三章就有 93% 的读者在职场和家庭沟通中获得了显著改善。 --- ### [01:22:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=4968s) 夫妻争吵的正面价值：冲突作为彼此了解的契机 在插播完关于 Adobe Express 赞助内容以及设计细节对追求卓越重要性的讨论后，话题转向了 Jefferson 亲历的艰难对话。除了早年为了离开父亲所在的律师事务所而经历的痛心对话之外，近期令他最受触动的，是与妻子 Sierra 之间的真实摩擦。 Jefferson 坦言，当夫妻产生冲突时，自己有时会陷入一种情绪冻结的“静止阻断状态”（go static）。即便内心充满悔意或难过，表面上却难以用情绪流露出来；此时他只能退而求其次，依赖清晰的言语直白告知对方：“我现在很难受，我也为自己的所作所为感到后悔；虽然我脸上可能看不出来，但这绝不是我引以为傲的行为。” 在一次两人准备长期出行的旅途前，他预料到朝夕相处难免会为琐事斗嘴，便试图通过提前周全规划来避免冲突，对妻子说：“如果我们这么做，大概就不会吵架了，一切都会很平稳。”然而 Sierra 却回应道：“无论吵不吵，都是好事”（Either way it's good）。这一洞见让 Jefferson 大受触动——不争吵固然平静，但如果发生了争执，那同样是值得庆幸的契机：因为每一次冲突，都是一次更深层次理解对方、认识伴侣真实边界与诉求的绝佳机会。 ### [01:24:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=5097s) 激烈的争执源于过往：如果情绪失控，必然事出有因 真正的亲密关系离不开对伴侣的“彻底坦诚”（radically honest），但这对许多人来说极为艰难。主持人分享了一个身边的真实事例：一位男性朋友向他大吐苦水，称自己对妻子最不能忍受的一点就是她每次出门前都要花极长的时间化妆打扮，导致两人总是迟到。这位朋友宣泄情绪的激烈程度让主持人感到震惊，他不禁思考：这究竟是该去跟妻子严肃沟通的合理诉求，还是小题大做？伴侣之间的每一次争吵都是合理的吗？ ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 表面冲突与深层心理机制 accDescr: 展示日常生活琐事争执如何由童年创伤与生存本能所驱动的心理机制路径。 subgraph Surface["表面冲突 (Surface Conflict)"] A["日常琐事冲突<br>（如：出门磨蹭、消费观念分歧）"] B["过激的情绪爆发<br>（Hysterical Response）"] end subgraph DeepRoot["深层根源 (Deep Root)"] C["童年创伤与生存机制<br>（Historical Childhood Wounds）"] D["自我价值与安全感映射<br>（Self-Worth & Security Triggers）"] end A --> B B --> C C --> D ``` 针对这种过度的情绪反应，杰斐逊·费舍尔（Jefferson Fisher）引用了心理咨询界的一句经典名言：“如果反应歇斯底里，根源必在过往历史”（If it's hysterical, it's historical）。当生活中的琐事引发极其强烈的情绪失控时，背后一定潜藏着更深层次的未愈创伤。人们常抱怨“某人总在踩我的底线/按我的情绪按钮”，但真正该问的是：“为什么那里会有一个按钮？”杰斐逊以自己的婚姻为例：在金钱观念上，他是“花钱派”，而妻子是“攒钱派”，妻子极具省钱天赋，甚至能“把一分钱掰成一毛钱用”（pinch a penny into a dime）。每次买东西，即便不知道价签，杰斐逊也总是本能地选最贵的，这让总是耐心等待打折的妻子非常抓狂。后来两人通过深入对话（甚至借助了杰斐逊自己的 AI 工具梳理）才发现，这种消费习惯植根于杰斐逊的童年：作为家中的长子，他小时候几乎没穿过新衣服，全用二手的旧物，久而久之便将“是否拥有好东西”与“自身价值感”画上了等号；成年后他买名牌玉米片、买知名品牌的药物，是在向外界证明自己的价值。当妻子不让他买好东西时，他潜意识里接收到的信号是“我不配得到好东西”。伴侣之间关于迟到或花钱的摩擦，本质上都是两个成年人在替内心的那个小孩发声。 - **核心心理格言**：“If it's hysterical, it's historical”——如果一件小事让你抓狂、大动干戈，这绝非单纯针对眼前的事，而是触发了过往深埋的情感创伤。 - **关于情绪按钮的反思**：不要一味指责别人总在踩你的开关，而要审视自己内心为何会残留这样一个极度敏感的脆弱点。 - **消费背后的价值投射**：杰斐逊买名牌生活用品不是为了炫耀，而是为了填补童年只能用二手物件所带来的自卑与不配得感。 --- ### [01:29:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=5348s) 原生家庭与代际创伤：争吵模式的代际复制 成年人在关系中的博弈，本质上是“内心的两个小孩在交锋”。心理学上常有一句戏谑而深刻的话：“父母最糟糕的一点，在于他们也曾有过父母。”人们往往只记恨父母对自己造成的伤害，却忽略了父母同样承受过上一代人的创伤，这就是所谓代际创伤的恶性循环（generational cycle）。打破这种循环的关键，在于主动选择不再复制这种痛苦，并以全新方式对待下一代。 杰斐逊在其著作《The Next Conversation: Argue Less, Talk More》中专门设计了一个章节，引导读者厘清自己从小耳濡目染的沟通模式： 1. **大吵大闹型**：在某些家庭或文化环境中，沟通必须伴随着拍桌咆哮、歇斯底里。杰斐逊回忆自己大约七岁去朋友家做客，目睹朋友父母在早餐吃麦片时爆发震耳欲聋的争吵，自己被吓得魂飞魄散，而那位朋友却像度过一个普通周二一样淡定地继续咽下麦片；甚至有人由此形成扭曲认知，认为“如果不冲我声嘶力竭地痛哭、互揭伤疤，就代表你根本不爱我”。 2. **回避沉默型**：在另一些家庭中，父母争吵时会把卧室门紧紧关上，不在孩子面前露出半点声响。而在更极端的高压家庭中，孩子会变成毫无存在感的“壁花”（wallflowers），因为童年经验告诉他们实话实说会招致惩罚，唯有撒谎和隐藏才能充当保护自己的盾牌。 当父母两人的沟通风格截然相反时，孩子最终会倾向于模仿那个投入更多时间陪伴自己、对自己更关注的人（例如有的孩子父母缺席，长期由来自肯塔基州的祖母带大，其言行口音就会完完全全像那位南方老太太）。杰斐逊强调，童年形成的撒谎、操纵或回避行为，在当年的家庭生存环境中都曾具备明确的“功能性实用价值”（utility）——它们曾保护过年幼的你或维系了家庭完整，但当这些应激机制被盲目带入成年后的亲密关系时，终究会变成破坏关系的毒药。 --- ### [01:33:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=5586s) 社交中令人反感的虚伪：警惕“闺蜜式轰炸” 在谈到人际交往中为何有些人会莫名其妙招人反感时，杰斐逊直言其核心原因在于“显得虚假”（it sounds fake）。识破一个人是否在假装热情，最典型的第一种表现便是所谓的“闺蜜式轰炸”（bestie bombing）。 - **概念定义**：“闺蜜式轰炸”类似于恋爱关系中的“情感轰炸”（love bombing），是指在两人刚认识甚至毫无深交的前提下，对方单方面进行极其浮夸、过度的情感绑定。 - **典型话术与行为**：例如刚在派对上并排站了一会儿，对方就大呼小叫：“我的天哪！我们简直是同一个人！”“我们绝对是命中注定的最好的闺蜜/灵魂伴侣（soulmate）！”“天哪，我们必须马上一起去旅行！” - **心理本质**：这种毫无防线、一上来就毫无保留地宣泄“我有多爱你”的狂热表现，绝非内心健全与安全型依恋（secure people）的表现。内心真正安全成熟的人绝不会瞬间对一个陌生人产生深度依赖与情感寄托，这本质上往往是一种带有操控性质的不健康社交策略。 ### [01:34:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=5646s) 识破虚伪的三大信号：假笑、过度吹捧与心不在焉 当一个人在社交中表现得过于热情时，这往往不是真正的掌控或蓄意操纵，而是一种深刻的不安全感。如果对方是带着算计且发自内心去执行的，那才是操纵；但很多时候，这种虚假关系表现为一种突兀的狂热——才刚认识，甚至连彼此的姓氏都不知道，对方就大呼“天哪，我们一定会成为最好的朋友！我太爱你了！”面对这种突如其来的亲密，任何人都会感到莫名其妙与防备。 除了这种虚浮的自来熟，辨别虚伪的第二个特征是“过度夸奖”与“虚假笑声”。人类拥有一种近乎本能的第六感，能够瞬间嗅出真实与做作的差别。没有人需要被专门教导何为假笑，大家心知肚明；正如每个人都有拍照专用的“营业微笑”和发自肺腑的灿烂笑容一样，假笑的声音往往与幽默程度完全脱节。类似的情况还发生在心不在焉的吹捧中：有人嘴上夸赞着“天哪，我太喜欢你这身行头了”，但头立刻转向了别处。这种夸赞纯粹是一种机械化的仪式，是他们为了维持“完美人设”而演出的剧本。当你面对的是一个盛装在特定角色里的演员在“入戏表演”时，你接触到的就绝非真实的灵魂。 第三个危险信号则是彻底缺乏对他人的好奇心。这类人从不询问关于你的任何事情，话题永远只围绕着他们自己打转。最典型的场景莫过于大型社交酒会：对方表面上在同你交谈，但眼神却越过你的肩膀，在整个房间里四处游移，焦躁地物色下一个更有价值的攀谈目标。一旦意识到听者的注意力已经涣散，对话就沦为尴尬的敷衍，彼此放慢语速，吐出几句毫无营养的“是啊，那太疯狂了”，同时都在心猿意马地寻找逃离当下的下一个借口。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 虚假社交与真正临在感的行为特征对比 accDescr: 展现虚假表演型交往与高真诚度临在感在行为模式及人际影响上的鲜明反差 subgraph Fake["虚假社交表演 (Inauthenticity)"] A1["过度熟络与吹捧<br/>（空洞赞美、夸张表态）"] --> A2["机械假笑与营业表情"] A2 --> A3["视线游移与缺乏兴趣<br/>（永远在物色下一个人）"] A3 --> A4["结果：引发戒备与信任崩塌"] end subgraph Real["真实的临在感 (Presence)"] B1["完全聚焦当下个体<br/>（眼神接触、记住姓名）"] --> B2["真诚的好奇心与倾听"] B2 --> B3["不带功利的时间投入<br/>（无论对方地位高低）"] B3 --> B4["结果：建立深刻的情感印记"] end ``` --- ### [01:37:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=5868s) 临在感是最高级的真诚：粉丝见面会与忽视的代价 在人际交往中，旁观者的眼睛往往比直接对话者更加敏锐。史蒂芬·巴特利特分享了一个他在公开演讲后的奇特发现：在动辄上百人的粉丝见面签售队列中，他经常会在事后收到几十条私信，内容并非关于他签售时说了什么，而是排队的人在队伍中注视着他如何对待前面每一位交谈者。人们会特意告诉他：“史蒂芬，你知道我注意到了什么吗？我看到你是多么专注地在倾听那个和你说话的人。”大众正是通过观察一个人如何对待素不相识的旁人，来评判其是否值得喜爱与信赖。 杰弗森·费雪对此给出了核心定义：“临在感是最高形式的真诚（Presence is the highest form of authenticity）。”所谓的临在，在于你是否真正“在这里”：你的眼神是否留在他身上？你是否容易被手机打扰？哪怕只有短短二十到三十秒的见面签售，你是否询问并使用了对方的名字？你的眼神中是否流露出真挚的谢意，明白“若没有你们的支持，眼前的一切都不会存在”？这种专注骗不了人。这与家庭生活同理，一个人整天待在家里并不等于陪伴，如果整晚只是陷在沙发上刷手机、看书，这种物理上的在场毫无临在感可言。 相反，缺乏临在感会带来灾难性的人际后果。网络上曾流传一段麦莉·赛勒斯（Miley Cyrus）与名模内奥米·坎贝尔（Naomi Campbell）在粉丝见面会上的视频，两人在活动中旁若无人地相互热聊，把上前合影的粉丝晾在一边，画面令人窒息。这种场面几乎没有获得公众原谅的空间： - 社交感知遵循“一处失误，全盘推定”的法则——“如果你能这样敷衍眼前的粉丝，你就会这样对待我”。 - 坏名声的传播速度与广度远超无数次的得体表现，即使一位明星在几千次互动中都表现友善，仅有一次因疲惫而失神冷漠，这段糟糕的插曲便会病毒式扩散。 - 正如那句名言所言：“人们会忘记你做过什么，但永远不会忘记你给他们带来的感受（People will forget what you did, but they'll never forget how you made them feel）。” - 真正的谦逊在于不忘初心。杰弗森直言自己不过是一个从得克萨斯小镇起步、在车里录视频的人，面对特意坐两小时飞机赶来签售会的读者，没有任何理由不拿出生命里的三分钟给予他们百分之百的专注。 --- ### [01:41:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6114s) 顶尖领导者的影响力：为每一个人留出时间 在商业世界与高级管理层中，真正的权力与个人魅力同样是由专注的临在感所定义的。史蒂芬分享了他公司新任命的董事会主席尼基（Nikki）的故事。尼基是一位履历显赫的商界传奇，曾在宝洁（Procter & Gamble）主导产品业务长达12年，随后在波士顿咨询集团（Boston Consulting Group, BCG）担任核心高管长达25年，目前正处于职业生涯的巅峰阶段。以他在全球范围内合作顶尖企业与领袖的资历，完全有资本表现出高高在上的权威姿态。 然而，当史蒂芬身在洛杉矶、距离公司总部5000英里之外时，听到基层反馈的评价却令人震撼。一位非常年轻的初级员工兴奋地对史蒂芬说：“我太喜欢尼基了！”当被追问原因时，这位年轻员工回答：“因为他坐下来，专门给了我整整一个小时的时间。” 后来史蒂芬才得知，尼基进入公司后，面对数百名员工，无论对方是一名刚入职的实习生还是最高执行官（CEO），他都亲自安排一对一的时间，毫无架子地坐下来专注倾听每一个人的声音。这种将完全的临在感与时间无差别给予他人的做法，跨越了职位层级的鸿沟，彻底塑造了整个团队对这位卓越领导者的敬意与追随。 ### [01:43:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6200s) 谦逊的本质：给予时间与平等待人 Jefferson Fisher 与 Steven Bartlett 探讨了人际交往中最宝贵的资源——时间。Jefferson 指出，当一个人习惯于付出时，给予的感觉就如同收获一样充实；当你慷慨地给予他人时间时，内心同样能感受到时间的滋养。他深入阐述了“谦逊”（Humility）的真正含义：“谦逊意味着你意识到自己和房间里的每个人一样怪异、一样糟糕（just as weird and terrible as everybody else）。”Jefferson 直言，在任何场合，自己绝不比排队的任何一个人、坐在台下的任何一位观众优越分毫，“我只是经历了很多，因为经历得多，所以懂得多一些而已”。 带着这种心态进入任何社交场合，目标就变成了平视并联结现场的每一个人。Jefferson 举例反问：如果自己今天走进录音室，只跟主持人 Steven 一个人交谈，却完全无视他的团队，会带来怎样的影响？真正的格局，不是去迎合全场最受欢迎、地位最高的人，而是同样去关注那些看似微不足道或最不起眼的人。放低身段，意识到“大家不过是待在同一个房间里的普通人，打个招呼聊聊天”，不仅能让对方感受到尊重，自己也会收获远超预期的深层反馈。 ### [01:45:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6309s) 攀岩墙悖论与“荒谬细节”的放大效应 Steven 对此深有感触，并分享了当天的真实细节：Jefferson 一走进录制间，不仅和他打招呼，还主动询问了负责幕后设备与摄像的制作人员 Bertha 的名字，并真诚地对她说了一句：“谢谢你今天做的一切（Thank you for doing this）。”Steven 感叹道，事情已经过去了两个半小时，但自己依然记忆犹新。因为在名利场或日常职场中，绝大多数人都会彻底忽视默默付出的幕后工作人员，而正是这种罕见的体贴，给人留下了无可替代的深刻印象。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 荒谬细节与认知捷径模型 accDescr: 展示细微荒谬的极值如何作为认知捷径让外界推导整体认知 subgraph Signal ["极值信号 (Extreme Outlier)"] A["罕见细节 / 荒谬之物<br>(如：健身房门口 100 英尺攀岩墙)"] B["对基层人员真诚致谢<br>(如：特意向幕后 Bertha 问候致谢)"] end subgraph Shortcut ["认知捷径 (Mental Shortcut)"] C["直观反推整体全貌<br>(断定健身房空间极大、设施极全)"] D["定性人品与底层修养<br>(断定当事人真正谦逊、体恤他人)"] end A --> C B --> D ``` Steven 由此提出了自己多年前写过的一个理论悖论——“看似无用的荒谬之物，往往比实用的常规特质更能定义你（Useless absurdity will define you more than useful practicality）”。他以自己以前去过的一家健身房为例：那家健身房入口处伫立着一面高达 100 英尺（约 30 米）的巨型室内攀岩墙。回家向女友描述时，他没有罗列里面有多少台跑步机或杠铃，而是直接指着这面看似夸张荒谬的攀岩墙说：“那地方太棒了，门口甚至有一面 100 英尺的攀岩墙！”这种极致、甚至略显多余的细节，成为了大脑评估整体规模的“认知捷径”（Mental Shortcut）。同理，在社交中，向最容易被忽略的幕后人员致以真挚谢意，就是那个反差极大的“攀岩墙”，它以最鲜明的方式向外界传达出你究竟是一个怎样的人。 ### [01:47:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6439s) 微小对话的力量与“隐形公关”效应 Jefferson 极为赞同这一观点，并指出决定人际温度的往往不是大舞台上的宏大演讲，而是生活缝隙中的琐碎对话——在自家车道上的寒暄、后院的闲聊、咖啡馆的互动、或是电梯里与陌生人错身而过时的问候。真正的善意常常体现在迂回的细节中：与其直接发短信吹捧某人，不如告诉对方“我刚和咱们共同的朋友吃完午餐，他提起你时赞不绝口”；或者送礼时不送给本人，而是挑选礼物送给对方的孩子，这种关照家人细节的分量会深刻得多。Jefferson 提到，每次自己受邀登台演讲，第一件事永远是主动结识为自己佩戴领夹麦克风、调试 AV 系统的幕后调音师或场工，询问他们的姓名、今天做了多久、累不累，而不是像很多人那样昂首阔步只盯着“大人物”。 Steven 进一步提出了“隐形公关（Invisible PR）”的概念：每个人的口碑都在最重大的时刻发挥决定性作用，但它却完全建立在那些看似最无关紧要的微小时刻。Steven 回忆起多年前在纽约办公室的经历：当时他身在 3,000 英里之外，收到团队发来的一条琐碎消息，说同事 Jenny 看到 Tim 不小心绊倒摔伤，立刻从工位跑过去翻出急救箱帮他包扎。一年后，当 Steven 坐在会议室里主持 Jenny 的晋升评估时，脑海中浮现的正是那个微小的瞬间，让他坚信“这就是值得公司全力培养和重用的人”。 - **关键概念：隐形公关（Invisible PR）**：个人声誉往往不在聚光灯下的正式汇报中确立，而在对平级、下属或陌生人的无意识举动中显现并口耳相传。 - **正反案例的对照**：Steven 提到，在播客第 3 期冷门时期，他曾分享过一位名人对自己极其粗鲁轻蔑的经历；结果三四年后播客爆火，听众翻出旧节目，那位名人才在 Twitter 上质问他。无心之失造成的负面印记同样会被长久铭记。 ### [01:50:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6623s) 话语的涟漪：负面记忆的长久杀伤力 Jefferson 顺着话题将讨论引向深层的人性心理：言语的破坏力与持久力。他让 Steven 回忆童年在操场或成长过程中是否曾有老师、长辈对自己说过温暖鼓励的话，Steven 立即表示至今难忘；但 Jefferson 紧接着指出，更根深蒂固、折磨人更久的，往往是童年时某个人一句刻薄、伤人的评价——尤其是关于外貌、体型或体重的随口嘲讽。 没有意识到自身破坏力的人，往往在不经意间随口一句话，就赠予了他人相伴一生的自卑与心理创伤（Insecurity）。Jefferson 指出，无论自己在面对多么庞大的听众群体演讲时做现场调查，只要问及“谁因为他人的一句负面评价而耿耿于怀至今”，举手的人数总是压倒性地多于因正面鼓励而受启发的人数。善意的回响固然深远，但恶语造成的伤痕不仅传播得更远、留存得更久，其产生的涟漪效应甚至会波及那些你从未谋面的无辜之人。 ### [01:52:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6720s) 言语的涟漪效应与人类进化的“八卦”本能 人与人之间的交流具有深远的连锁反应。你对待一个人的方式，不仅塑造了对方对你的看法，甚至会波及那些从未谋面的人。杰弗逊·费舍尔（Jefferson Fisher）举例道，父母如何跟孩子说话，直接决定了孩子未来如何跟他们自己的下一代沟通，影响延伸到几代人之后。更普遍的日常场景是：你在结账时对收银员的态度——是礼貌温和，还是因为对方动作稍慢就显得粗鲁不耐烦——会直接决定那个收银员下班回家后的情绪。他们可能会回到家对家人说“我今天过得糟透了”，并把这股怨气撒在自己的孩子身上。我们随意说出的一句话，不知不觉中便要为千里之外某个家庭的晚餐氛围承担责任。积极的影响能够持久流传，消极的影响同样具有破坏性的延展力。 史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）赞同这一点，并指出从进化生物学的角度来看，人类之所以能繁衍生存至今，很大程度上正是因为我们擅长“八卦”和讲故事。在远古时代，人类需要通过口耳相传建立声誉系统：在某个人踏进部落之前，大家就已经知道此人是否具有危险性；或者提前警告同伴“别靠近那个洞穴，里面有猛兽会要了我们的命”。从本质上说，打听名声、传递故事是人类刻在基因里的生存适应机制。即便在没有报纸的古老时代，旅行者穿梭于城镇之间，人们最先问的第一句话也永远是：“最近有什么新鲜消息？” ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 言语影响力的连锁传递链 accDescr: 展示个人交流态度如何通过人际网络产生广泛的跨代及社会性连锁反应 subgraph S1["个体当下互动"] A["个人交流态度（耐心 vs 粗暴）"] --> B["对方情绪反应（受挫或被尊重）"] end subgraph S2["次级辐射效应"] B --> C["家庭互动（如收银员将负面情绪带给孩子）"] C --> D["代际传承（孩子未来对待下一代的方式）"] end subgraph S3["社会信任机制"] A --> E["声誉传播（远古八卦本能/生存警示）"] end ``` --- ### [01:53:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6798s) 卓越沟通者的五大核心法则：终极追求是自我价值感 史蒂文顺势向费舍尔提出一个核心问题：如果要把所有技巧、肢体语言和策略浓缩起来，一个人要想成为顶尖的沟通者、通过对话在人生中得偿所愿，最重要的五件事是什么？史蒂文认为，无论是练习肢体语言还是精进谈话话术，人们最终无非是想在生活中获得某些结果——更好的亲密关系、职场晋升、赢得尊重或实现世俗的成功。但史蒂文追问费舍尔：“这些技巧推倒的‘最后一张多米诺骨牌’到底是什么？人们内心深处究竟在寻找什么？” 费舍尔毫不犹豫地回答：“自我价值感（Self-worth）。也就是探寻：‘我到底够不够好？（Am I enough?）’。”所有外在的沟通渴望，底色都是对自身存在价值的确认。 随后，费舍尔给出了成为卓越沟通者的第一项法则： 1. **真实性（Authenticity）** 费舍尔直言：“如果我不能对你保持真诚与真实，那我在你面前就什么也不是（If I cannot be genuine with you, I can be nobody to you）。”但这并不意味着把情绪肆意宣泄给外界。即便在工作不顺、心情极度糟糕的日子，保持真实也不等于有权利对清晨向你打招呼的同事大发雷霆。职场有其社交规范，真实的意义在于“不要假装快乐”，没有必要在内心崩溃时强颜欢笑。 史蒂文随即抛出一个职场常见难题来检验“真实性”：“说谎算不算违背真实？比如同事兴冲冲跑过来问你：‘你觉得我的新发型怎么样？’而你心里觉得奇丑无比，你该怎么回答？”费舍尔笑着回答，他不会违心夸奖，可能会说：“这真是一个别致的选择（It's an interesting choice）。”费舍尔解释道，他绝不会当面撒谎，而是会把关注焦点转移到对方身上——只要对方自己喜欢，那就是最棒的，对方不需要靠自己的审美偏好来赋予那个发型价值。真实作为一种长期策略，虽然短期内可能面临尴尬，但能在岁月中沉淀出坚不可摧的信任。 关于人们为何难以保持真实，费舍尔深刻指出：那些极度讨好他人、无法做自己的人，往往童年成长在缺乏安全感（无论是身体安全还是心理安全）的环境中。由于随时提防着“另一只鞋子掉下来”，他们始终处于紧绷和焦虑之中，神经系统从未得到真正的休整。这种无法坦然展现自我的状态，本质上是严酷恶劣的成长环境所逼迫出来的生存防御机制。 --- ### [01:56:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6995s) 消除干扰：一根红绳揭开“心不在焉”的杀伤力 费舍尔提出的第二大沟通法则是**减少分心（Reduce the amount of distraction）**，其核心目的在于增强当下感（Increase presence）。如果想让对方感受到你的存在，首要任务就是物理性地消除一切让你分心的事物，首当其冲的便是智能手机。 为了直观证明分心如何瞬间摧毁连接，费舍尔在现场做了一个震撼的道具演示。他拿出了一根漂亮的红色细绳，将绳子的一端递给史蒂文，另一端握在自己手中。两人同时拉住，红绳在空中绷得笔直： - **紧绷的红绳象征着专注而深刻的谈话连接**。费舍尔注视着史蒂文的眼睛，询问他的近况、昨天的烦心事（史蒂文打趣提到昨天的理发不顺心）以及商业上的挑战。在这个阶段，两端受力均匀，情绪通道完全敞开。 - **掏出手机的瞬间**：当史蒂文正准备深入分享工作上的困扰时，费舍尔突然单手掏出手机低头查看。在物理层面，红绳瞬间松弛垂落；在心理感受上，史蒂文直言：“感觉受到了极大的不尊重（It felt disrespectful）。” - **“一边看手机一边听”的伪专注**：费舍尔紧接着演示了更常见的场景——他重新把红绳拉得紧绷，示意史蒂文继续说这个周末有什么期待。但就在史蒂文开口的同时，费舍尔虽然手里攥紧绳子，眼睛却斜向了手机屏幕，嘴里敷衍着：“没事你接着说，我听着呢，绳子还紧着呢，我还在。”就在那一瞬间，史蒂文下意识地松开了自己手中的绳子。 费舍尔敏锐地指出了这一举动的心理学意义：虽然说话的人嘴上承诺在听，但只要注意力挪开，倾听者就等于向对方发出了“你并不重要”的信号，促使原本说话的人主动放弃了对话。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 手机干扰对交流连接的心理破坏过程 accDescr: 演示对话中注意力被手机分散后导致沟通彻底破裂的心理闭环 A["双方维持高质量专注（红绳紧绷）"] --> B["一方低头查看手机 / 声称'我正在听'"] B --> C["物理张力松弛 或 心理诚意归零"] C --> D["表达者产生被轻视感（Disrespected）"] D --> E["表达者主动放弃交流（松开手中绳子）"] E --> F["传染性看手机行为：聚餐双方各自埋头刷屏幕"] ``` 这种破坏性在日常聚餐中屡见不鲜：当同桌的人掏出手机，旁人为了缓解尴尬或者不显得局促，就像获得了某种“合法许可”一样，也会立刻掏出自己的手机。原本旨在增进感情的聚会，瞬间演变成两个人面对面各自低头刷屏幕的荒诞景象。 史蒂文联想到自己主持播客时面前摆放的 iPad，坦言自己有时记笔记或查阅资料时也会担忧这是否构成了对嘉宾的干扰。费舍尔安慰道，演播室录制本质上是一场带有摄像机和灯光的专业制作，与私人社交不可同日而语。但他强调，在普通的私人午餐中，即便你只是把手机屏幕朝上放在餐桌上，对方都能清晰感受到连接的降级；若将手机屏幕朝下扣放在桌面上，传递出的信号则是“这场谈话更重要，我不想被干扰”；而最具震撼力、最能让对方感到备受重视的做法，是在约会或见朋友时坦然告诉对方：“我把手机留在车里了，今天我只想好好陪你坐一会儿。”在当今这个高度信息成瘾的时代，这种纯粹的注意力几乎成了最罕见也最珍贵的馈赠。 ### [02:00:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7252s) 手机：现代人逃避焦虑的“精神安抚奶嘴” 对话从一个约会场景切入：如果一名女性在约会时问男方“你的手机呢？”，男方回答“我留在车里了”，这种举动在当下往往会让人大吃一惊。史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）打趣道，这种行为因为过于反常，甚至可能被某些人看作是“危险信号”（Red flag）——对方可能会想：“天哪，你难道想把全部注意力都放在我身上吗？你是想向我传递‘没有任何事情比此刻更重要’的信号吗？” 杰斐逊·费舍尔（Jefferson Fisher）对此深有同感。他指出，现代人即便把手机屏幕朝下扣在桌上，内心深处其实仍然把自己的整个世界、工作、压力与混乱摆在两人之间。手机已经演化成成年人的“安抚奶嘴”（pacifier）或“安全毯”： - 哪怕手机只是放在腿间或口袋里，只要它在手边，就仍旧会介入对话之中； - 当一个人在倾听时拿出手机敷衍地附和“嗯、对、你继续说”，这根代表“真实连接”的绳子其实就已经彻底松开断裂了； - 杰斐逊和妻子塞拉（Sierra）外出就餐时，目之所及尽是在幽暗的餐厅中被手机屏幕荧光照亮脸孔的情侣、朋友，甚至连很多人在家里沙发上看电视时，彼此也各自盯着手机。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 手机对当下真实连接的侵蚀 accDescr: 流程图展示了现代人利用手机逃避无聊和焦虑，最终破坏人际沟通中真实连接的过程。 subgraph S1["日常焦虑与不适"] A["排队 / 乘车 / 诊所候诊"] --> B["难以忍受空白与沉默"] end subgraph S2["手机作为逃避手段"] B --> C["掏出手机刷屏<br/>（精神安抚奶嘴）"] C --> D["彻底回避自发性对话"] end subgraph S3["社交后果"] D --> E["在场感丧失与连接断裂"] end ``` 史蒂文分享了自己与女友的约会铁律：去餐厅吃饭绝不掏出手机。他们甚至会在餐厅里玩一个“观察猜人”的小游戏，通过举止猜测邻座情侣在一起多久了，结果发现最常见的反而是年轻情侣全程无言、各自埋头刷手机。费舍尔分析，这背后的核心根源是人们对空白和焦虑的逃避——在地铁上、排队结账、理发店或医院候诊室里，人们宁愿选择低头刷屏幕来阻断与现实的接触，彻底丧失了过去那种人与人自然攀谈的生机。因此，成为优秀沟通者的第二点原则就是：**减少外界干扰，提升全身心的在场感（Presence）**。 --- ### [02:04:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7452s) 停止过度解释：做一口深邃的“泉井”，而非倾泻的“瀑布” 杰斐逊提出了顶级沟通者的第三条核心法则：**停止过度解释（Stop overexplaining）**。如果一个人在交谈中总是语速飞快、滔滔不绝地倾倒大量字句，听众不仅不会被说服，反而会自然而然地对发言者的内容大打折扣，这就像“狼来了”的故事一样，过多的言语噪音会让真正的核心信息彻底失真。 为了帮助人们克服过度解释的冲动，费舍尔提出了一个鲜明生动的隐喻： > “不要做倾泻的瀑布，去做一口沉静的泉井（Instead of being a waterfall, be a well）。” - **瀑布模式**：试图把所有信息一次性倾泻而出，试图用言语巨浪将对方席卷冲垮。这通常表明发言者缺乏自信，因为吃不准对方是否相信、或者自己是否确信，才不得不疯狂补充细节； - **泉井模式**：对自己的知识储备充满底气，沉静从容地蓄水。只在恰当的时候提供对方所需要的信息，若对方有疑问，井水自会供其汲取； - **呼吸法则**：杰斐逊建议将“呼吸”置于原本开口要说的第一个词的位置（“Let your first word be your breath”）。很多人往往是一边说话一边在脑子里临时拼凑逻辑，频繁说出“我的意思是……”或“我绕这么大一圈是想说……”，而深吸一口气后的停顿，能从生理上稳住阵脚，让流出的语言更有分量。 --- ### [02:07:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7678s) 停顿与留白的博弈力量：真正的自信是敢于承认“我不知道” 史蒂文深刻指出，当一个人面对棘手提问时坦然说出“让我先想一想”，听众的反应绝非轻视，反而会屏息凝神、满怀期待地等待那个经过深思熟虑的高质量回答。敢于在对话中“抢夺”并享受7秒钟静默的人，散发着一种独特的气场，因为这向所有人传递出明确信号：我不急躁，我有资格占据这段时间和空间。 真正的自信拥有以下特质： - **不急于自证**：自信并不意味着必须通过立刻抢答来证明自己无所不知，自信的人懂得挑选出手的时机与节奏； - **坦承局限**：那些真正具有强大内核的人，最容易平静地说出“这个问题我现在没有答案”。自信不是掌握所有答案，而是清醒地认识并接受“我并非无所不知”； - **风暴中的舵手效应**：面对重大危机与艰难决策，外界越慌乱，领导者越需要放慢节奏。正如狂风暴雨中的巨轮，全船惊慌失措的人都会下意识望向镇定自若的船长。在极度高压的情境下，法则永远是“沉着漫步，绝不慌乱奔跑（Walk, don't run）”。 ### [02:09:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7757s) 情绪锚点：如镇定的空乘般掌控局势 Jefferson Fisher 探讨了在危机时刻保持冷静的巨大影响力。他指出，许多经常处理冲突与危机管理的专业人士（例如急诊医生），其职责之一就是在现场展现出极致的沉着。因为专业人员一旦流露出慌乱或激动的神色，就会让当事人彻底失去定海神针；如果没有了这个“锚（anchor）”，全场就会陷入灾难性的恐慌。在对话中，一个人如果能从容地说一句“让我思考片刻（Let me think about that for a second）”，瞬间就会散发出一种完全不同的气场——这表明他们清晰地知道自己是谁，拥有不被催促的底气。 这种状态引发了 Steven Bartlett 的强烈共鸣。Steven 分享道，每次乘机遇到剧烈颠簸时，他本能的第一反应永远是转头观察空乘人员的面部表情：如果看到空乘依旧若无其事地推着小车发放零食、神态自若，他心里就会松一口气，告诉自己“既然他们都不慌，那肯定没问题”。Jefferson 极力赞同这一比喻，并指出人们在日常对话和人际互动中，其实无时无刻不在寻找这样的“镇定空乘”。在动荡与压力来临之际，大家都在寻找可以依赖的定海神针与船长；如果你能在他人焦虑失控时成为那个稳住全场的人，那么在大家眼里，你天然就是一位真正的领导者。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 情绪调节与领导力反馈循环 accDescr: 展示危机时刻冷静反应如何稳定团队并确立领导力 subgraph S1["危机与动荡时刻"] A["突发危机 / 剧烈颠簸"] --> B{"核心人物的反应"} end subgraph S2["两种反应路径"] B -- "慌张、情绪失控" --> C["焦虑蔓延整个团队<br/>失去定海神针"] B -- "极致沉着、稳定节奏" --> D["扮演'镇定空乘'<br/>成为情绪调节器"] end subgraph S3["团队认知结果"] D --> E["团队温度下降<br/>重建信任与掌控感"] E --> F["确立无可替代的领袖威信"] end ``` ### [02:10:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7838s) 真正领导者的特质：大难临头时的情绪调节力 Steven 指出，在过去多年的用人经验中，他评估一个人是否具备领袖潜能的核心指标，正是看其在“大难临头（when shit hits the fan）”时的表现。如果一个人在面对突发危机时，言行举止与平时几乎没有异样，能充当团队的“情绪调节器（emotional regulator）”，把全场的焦虑温度迅速降下来，此人必是领袖之才；相反，若遇到丝毫风吹草动就陷入慌乱与压力过载，这种情绪便会迅速传染给整个团队。Steven 回忆起七八年前雇佣的一位名叫 Oliver 的员工，Oliver 最突出的特质就是汇报任何消息时都保持着同样的冷静与从容。无论是在全美签下 Uber 这样的大单，还是公司某一天彻底炸锅、遭遇灭顶之灾，Oliver 走过来的神态与开场白永远平稳如一。面对最坏的噩耗，Oliver 的从容会让倾听者也平静下来，坚信局势尚在可控范围内，这让 Steven 毫不犹豫地决定将更多团队交由他管理。 Jefferson 随后补充，情绪的传染性在领导者身上会被成倍放大。若领导者本身喜怒无常，任何微不足道的小事都表现出暴跳如雷的“10级反应”，下属将根本无法区分何为真正的生死关头；只有当领导者平日始终保持平静，在极其罕见的关头偶尔爆发一次，团队才会真正意识到“情况非同小可”。针对军队长官或体育主教练常常为了细节大声咆哮的现象，两人探讨了这背后的逻辑：这种看似非理性的严厉，实则是维系严苛标准的一种经过验证的管理系统，背后具备明确的功能性（utility）。相反，如果某些领导者仅仅是因为词汇匮乏而动辄破口大骂、发泄情绪，这种失控的语言只会彻底削弱其威信与说服力。 ### [02:16:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8208s) 顶级沟通法则第四条：面对悲伤，停止说“有事随时叫我” 在回顾了成为顶尖沟通者的前三项原则——第一保持真实、第二减少干扰（远离手机）、第三停止过度解释之后，Jefferson 提出了第四个核心原则：**懂得如何应对他人的悲伤（Know how to deal with their sadness）**。 生活中很多人其实正在默默承受着外界未曾察觉的痛苦与哀恸，可能是因为节日触景生情，也可能是某个只有他们自己知晓的隐秘纪念日。Jefferson 强调，真正高水准的沟通者绝不能只会在顺境中说漂亮话，更必须懂得如何在低谷中与心碎之人相处。 面对处于巨大悲伤中的人，Jefferson 给出了至关重要的警示：**绝对不要用“如果有需要就告诉我……”（Let me know if...）作为开场白**。诸如“有任何需要随时找我”、“如果我能帮上什么忙尽管说”看似体贴温和，但本质上不仅起不到任何安慰效果，反而是将思考需要什么、如何开口求助的心理负担当作一项沉重的“杂务（chore）”，直接甩给了早已心力交瘁的受难者。 - 面对重大事件，情绪稳定的员工能让上级和团队产生本能的安全感与掌控感 - 频繁在低烈度事件上情绪过载，会导致真正的重大危机失去区分度 - 军旅与竞技体育中的严苛训斥往往服务于既定的操练系统与标准维护，而非单纯的情绪宣泄 - 面对正在经历丧亲或重大创伤的人，避免说“有需要随时叫我（Let me know if you need anything）”，这种话语实际上是变相给悲伤者增加了认知负担 ### [02:18:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8284s) 慰藉悲痛者：停止推卸责任，直接付诸行动 当一个人正处于巨大的悲痛之中时，他们正在经历常人难以想象的痛苦，甚至痛苦到不知道该如何感受、甚至一度失去生存的意愿。杰斐逊·费舍尔（Jefferson Fisher）指出，很多人在面对悲痛者时，往往会随口说一句“如果有任何需要，随时告诉我（Let me know if you need anything）”。这种看似好意的话，本质上是把责任反手抛给了对方，变成了一项繁重的家务差事（chore）和义务（obligation）。一个正陷入绝望谷底的人，怎么可能主动拿出手机给你发信息求助？事实证明，几乎从来没有人会在听到这句话后真的开口提要求。这样说只是让给予慰问的人图个省心，心理上觉得“我已经尽到心意了”，却给身处极度痛苦中的人增添了心理负担，因为悲痛者最不希望的就是成为别人的负担。 费舍尔提出，真正帮助悲痛者的方法只有一条：**直接去做，别去询问**。你脑海中冒出过什么念头，就直接付诸行动： - 如果想过给他们送晚餐，不要问“你需要吃的吗”，直接把饭菜送过去； - 帮他们跑腿办事、去家里帮忙洗衣服，或者默默把他们家门前的草坪修剪好； - 如果你真的想陪在对方身边，无需征求许可，直接把事情做好。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 慰藉悲痛者的沟通模式对比 accDescr: 对比传统口头客套与真正有效行动之间的心理负荷与结果差异 subgraph BadPattern ["口头客套（增加对方负担）"] A["说出：'有需要随时告诉我'"] --> B["将沟通与求助责任推给悲痛者"] B --> C["悲痛者感到负担与尴尬，选择沉默"] end subgraph GoodPattern ["具体行动（真正提供支持）"] D["产生帮助想法（送饭/跑腿/洗衣服）"] --> E["直接去把事情做完，不设前置条件"] E --> F["悲痛者获得无负担的切实支持"] end ``` ### [02:19:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8373s) 拒绝陈词滥调：以具体、真实的共情确认对方的感受 面对处于困境中的人，很多人因为不知该说什么而感到尴尬，甚至对着手机反复编辑文本、删了又写、写了又删，总觉得自己的话分量不够。费舍尔强调，此时最该做的是**确认并认可（validate）对方的真实痛苦**。明确表达出：“没有人应该承受这种事情，这完全是不公平的”、“我无法相信会发生这种事”。不要试图用“至少他们去了更好的地方”或者“一切事情的发生都有其原因”这种陈旧且伤人的说辞去粉饰太平。对于痛失挚爱的人来说，他们唯一真正想要的是把逝者带回来，而这是任何人都做不到的。 同样地，人们常在社交媒体留言或发信息说“你一直在我的祈祷和思念中（Thoughts and prayers）”，但其中绝大多数人转头就忘，甚至根本没有真正做过一次祈祷。费舍尔直言，在社交媒体上随手发一条评论毫无意义，那是廉价的偷懒捷径，根本谈不上真实的人际联结。如果真的在为对方祈祷，不妨把整段祷告词逐字打成信息发过去；如果真的在思念对方，发一条信息并明确注明“我想着你呢，不用回复我（Thinking about you. No need to respond）”，免去对方回复的社交压力。 史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）对此深有共鸣。他分享道，YouTube 频道 Colin and Samir 的联合创始人萨米尔（Samir Chaudry）的房子曾在加州帕利塞兹大火（Palisades Fire）中被彻底烧毁，当时萨米尔和他的搭档都刚有了不到一岁的婴儿。四到六个月后，萨米尔在纽约的一场活动中特意找到刚下台的史蒂文，当面感谢他当时发的信息，并强调：“很多人都给我发了慰问，但我唯独记住了你的，因为你提供的是**非常具体的帮助**。” 费舍尔总结道，不论是慰问还是赞美，**越具体就越真诚**。真正能让人铭记一生的，永远是那些放弃贪图自身便利、愿意承受一点麻烦与尴尬，在他人跌入谷底、脸贴在地板上时真正到场（show up）并感同身受的人。 ### [02:24:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8681s) 顶级沟通者法则：化解侮辱与贬低的“三步降维打击” 在探讨如何成为顶尖沟通者的第五项法则时，话题转向了如何应对生活中的恶意——那些冷嘲热讽、暗中中伤、轻视、贬低和居高临下的言语攻击。当别人试图用言语刺痛你时，费舍尔给出了一个直击要害的三步应对策略： 1. **保持 5 到 7 秒的彻底沉默**：用一段足够漫长、让气氛变得极度尴尬的绝对静默来回应对方。这会让施加言语攻击的人意识到，接下来的场面绝不会轻松。 2. **要求对方当众重复一遍**：“我需要你把刚才那句话再说一遍（I need you to say that again）。”在大多数情况下，失去突袭优势的挑衅者根本没有勇气当面重复一遍。 3. **精准反问意图**：如果对方依然嘴硬，直接抛出反问：“你刚才那句话，是故意想要显得粗鲁无礼吗？是故意想要让我难堪吗？还是故意想要伤害我？” 费舍尔剖析背后的沟通心理学机制：言语攻击者往往先将聚光灯打在自己身上，然后通过伤人的话瞬间将聚光灯投射到受害者身上，渴望看到受害者的慌乱、愤怒或痛苦反应。而长达数秒的沉默与冷静反问，就像是一面镜子，不仅挡住了言语的刺痛，还将刺眼的聚光灯瞬间反弹回挑衅者身上，让恶毒的字句在空气中回荡。绝大多数人根本承受不住当面承认自己居心叵测的羞耻感，只能慌忙找补：“不不不，我不是那个意思，其实我想说的是……”，从而被迫收敛锋芒、改变话题。而如果对方极其顽固地当场承认“对，我就是故意要羞辱你”，你也只需极其从容地回敬一句：“谢谢你让我知道你的真实态度”，彻底剥夺对方从情绪失控中获取快感的可能。 ### [02:26:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8819s) 认知失调与情绪转移：操控者为何总想激怒你 斯蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）与杰斐逊·费舍尔（Jefferson Fisher）探讨了当人们被当面指出言语伤人时的心理反应。斯蒂芬提到神经科学中的“认知失调”（Cognitive Dissonance）概念：每个人对自我形象都有一套积极的投射，坚信自己站在正义和良善的一方，“没有人认为自己是坏人”。当你直接反问对方“你刚才那句话是故意想伤害我吗？”时，实际上是将一面镜子推到了他们眼前，直击他们的核心身份认同。如果他们承认自己是故意的，就必须面对自身行为与“我是个善良的人”这一自我认知之间的剧烈冲突与心理不适；为了缓解这种失调，他们往往不得不收敛或改口。 费舍尔笑着补充道，那些喜欢对他人施加心理操控或煤气灯效应（Gaslighting）的人，本质上常常是因为自身处于痛苦或失控之中。他们的内心逻辑往往是：“我现在很痛苦，我也要让你跟我一样痛苦；我现在失去了掌控感，只要我能把你也激怒，我就能重新夺回控制权，并让我自己的负面情绪显得理所当然。”更为隐蔽和恶劣的操控手段在于，挑衅者故意说出尖酸刺骨的话将你彻底激怒，随后却立刻抽身事外，摆出一副无辜冷静的姿态反问：“我不知道你为什么这么生气？我很好啊，我很平静。”通过这种方式，他们轻而易举地将自己无法消化的毒性情绪全盘倒给对方，将受害者孤立在情绪的泥潭中。 - **认知失调的镜像效应**：促使对方直面言行与自我善恶认知之间的矛盾，迫使其为了维护自身形象而退让或澄清。 - **情绪卸载机制**：操控者通过言语激怒他人来转移自身的不适与无力感，一旦对方情绪失控，操控者便借机确立心理优势并推卸责任。 --- ### [02:28:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8923s) 健身房挑衅故事：以好奇心与平静提问瓦解攻击 斯蒂芬分享了一段多年前在健身房的亲身经历：一位略微年长的男子坚称场内所有器械都是他要用的，并在短短十五秒内情绪失控，甚至直接向斯蒂芬约架。面对这荒谬的一幕，斯蒂芬并没有愤怒还击，反而觉得自己像是在解说大自然纪录片的戴维·阿滕伯勒（David Attenborough），带着一种极度平静甚至略带好奇的超脱视角审视全场。他压低嗓音、用极其平稳的声音认真发问：“你刚才是在健身房里约我打架吗？”这一句没有任何攻击性却直切本质的真诚提问，瞬间让对方气焰全消、不知所措。 费舍尔对此深表赞同，并指出当一个人大喊大叫、恶语相向时，其表象下的真实信号其实是极度脆弱的“我现在很不好”（I'm not okay）。费舍尔自己在面对言语伤害时，也经常平静地反问：“你原本期待我听到这句话后怎么回应？”或者“你刚才觉得我会作何反应？”面对这样的追问，挑衅者从未回答过“我期待你反过来骂我”，无一例外都会开始结结巴巴地往后退缩、试图解释自己当下的真实感受。费舍尔强调，应对攻击时的黄金心态是“不要试图去证明什么，而是抱着学习与探究的心态”（Don't have something to prove, have something to learn）。提问是一面具有强大解除武装力量的镜子，能瞬间将对抗的框架转变为反思的框架。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 应对语言攻击与冲突的沟通转化路径 accDescr: 展示面对挑衅时从本能的情绪对抗转变为提问与好奇的去情绪化流程 subgraph DefenseMechanism ["面对言语攻击与挑衅"] A["遭遇恶劣挑衅 / 伤人言论"] --> B{"本能反应 vs 理性选择"} B -->|"本能对抗: 愤怒反击"| C["陷入操控者陷阱: 升级冲突"] B -->|"转换框架: 抱持好奇"| D["平静反问: 递出镜子"] end subgraph MirrorEffect ["镜像提问技术"] D --> E["'你刚才是在约我打架吗？'"] D --> F["'你原本期待我作何反应？'"] E & F --> G["暴露荒谬行为 / 瓦解攻击框架"] G --> H["促使挑衅者退缩并正视自身真实需求"] end ``` --- ### [02:31:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9079s) 亲密关系沟通的三大原则：先认可、求重置与拆分问题 费舍尔坦言自己也有情绪触发点，但他总结出三条能够彻底改变伴侣沟通与人际冲突的底层法则： 首先是**“先认可感受，再表达情绪”**（Validate first, frustration comes next）。如果一开始就带着沮丧或愤怒反弹，沟通必败无疑。必须先真诚地表达理解：“你会有这种感受完全合情合理，我完全能明白你为什么会这么想。”在亲密关系中，如果伴侣的情绪得不到确认，他们会下意识觉得“是我太作了、我的需求超负荷了”（I'm being too much），进而触发被抛弃的恐惧。唯有先给予对方和自己一个允许展现不完美（safe space to be messy）的安全容器，关系才具备韧性与弹性。 其次是**善用“重置请求”**（Asking for a reset）。费舍尔将请求重置比作 Uno 纸牌中的万能变色牌（Wild Card）。当发现自己某句话语气不对或措辞不妥时，立刻坦白承认：“我刚才那句话说得不合适，我能重新说一次吗？”在现实生活中，只要你真诚请求重置，没有人会残忍地拒绝并强迫你一错到底。就像玩电子游戏一样，明知走向死局就该重新读档，给予彼此随时重来的宽容是长期关系的必备素养。 最后是**“切碎议题、细化拆分”**（Slice it thinner）。在爆发激烈争吵时，人们往往因为无助感而把陈年旧账全部翻出来打包堆叠在一起，导致问题无限扩大且无法解决。正确的做法是将问题薄切细分，温和且坚定地将注意力锚定在当下核心点：“那件事我也很想和你谈，但我们先集中精力把眼前这一件事讲清楚。” - **先予认可**：化解伴侣“自己要求过多、即将被抛弃”的深层恐慌。 - **主动重置**：勇敢喊停说错的话，借由“读档重来”防止争吵滑向失控。 - **议题薄切**：拒绝翻旧账式的议题打包，一次只解决一个具体矛盾。 --- ### [02:34:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9250s) “电量检查”：用能量百分比规避无谓冲突 斯蒂芬结合自身经历补充了一个极具实操性的沟通工具，该方法源自学者布芮尼·布朗（Brené Brown）的视频分享：在结束漫长疲惫的一天回到家时，伴侣之间可以主动通报自己当天“油箱里还剩百分之几的电量/能量”。例如推开门直接坦白：“听着，我今天整个人只剩下 10% 的电量，今天真的经不起任何严肃沉重的讨论了。” 这种坦白前置了当事人的心理负荷基准，任何理性的伴侣听到对方只剩 10% 的能量时，都不会强行开启硬碰硬的严肃谈判。费舍尔赞叹这一机制非常实用，并指出将数字化百分比引入对话具有极强的降维减压效果——不仅适用于亲密关系（“我只有 10%，你有 40%，那我们今天合力先把日子对付过去”），在职场团队协作与会议沟通中同样能让彼此清晰掌握协作边界，避免在对方能量耗尽时引爆非理性的职场摩擦。 ### [02:35:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9315s) “我只有20%的想法”：用不完美邀请协作 当一个人在团队中抛出一个看似完备的方案（例如说“要是这样行不行？”）时，其他人的本能往往不是支持，而是开始放暗箭、挑毛病，试图将其全盘推翻——原因很简单，因为这方案不是他们提出来的。Jefferson Fisher 指出，改变这种对抗局面的秘诀在于主动示弱，明确表达自己的不完整：“你看，我这儿大概只有30%的想法。” 这种沟通策略能瞬间引发奇妙的心理转变。如果对合作伙伴坦承：“听着，我脑子里只有20%的构想，剩下那80%我需要你的帮助。”对方立刻会产生一种“我能帮上忙、我有发挥空间”的受重视感，进而主动投入进来添砖加瓦，而不是试图拆台。在日常对话中也是同理，一句直率的预设——“我知道自己待会儿可能辞不达意，我大概只能表达出60%的真实意思”——就是在提前确认自己的局限，从而迅速消除对方的防御心理，为真诚的交流铺平道路。 --- ### [02:36:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9364s) 婚姻从不是“五五开”：能量量化与“电量告急”机制 谈及亲密关系，Steven Bartlett 提到了播客中常被引用的一个经典观点：“所有人都说婚姻应当是对等的‘五五开’（50/50），但这纯粹是无稽之谈，婚姻从来就不是平分的。”真正健康的伴侣关系在于能够彼此量化自身的能量水平。例如某天回到家感到筋疲力尽，直接告诉伴侣：“在能量、耐心和善意方面，我现在只有20分。”对方若处于良好状态，便会接应道：“交给我吧，我来顶上剩下的80分。” ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 伴侣能量对齐与沟通决策流程 accDescr: 展示当双方总能量大于等于100与低于100时的不同应对机制，以及红电保护策略。 subgraph S1["能量状态评估"] A["每日能量盘点<br/>（耐心、善意、精力）"] --> B{"双方能量总和<br/>是否达到 100%？"} end subgraph S2["应对模式"] B -- "是 (>= 100%)" --> C["优势方承担差额<br/>（如一人20%，另一人撑起80%）"] B -- "否 (< 100%)" --> D["触发善意预案<br/>坐下来坦诚沟通，绝不互相伤害"] end subgraph S3["冲突止损"] D --> E{"单方电量是否见红？<br/>（Battery in the red）"} E -- "是" --> F["强制暂停（Time Out）<br/>离开战场休息，避免恶言相向"] E -- "否" --> G["低消耗沟通与相互体谅"] end ``` 当双方同时遭遇低谷（例如家人生病、工作受挫），一人只有10分，另一人也勉强只有25分时，总和便远低于100分。此时双方必须启动协议：围坐在桌前，制定一份“对彼此保持极致善意的计划”，达成“不在这段脆弱期伤害彼此”的共识。Jefferson 结合自己与妻子 Sierra 的相处经验坦言，自己在气头上时往往明知一句道歉就能平息风波，但当下就是“不想认错、还没准备好咽下这口气”。在这种情绪逼近极限时，他会使用一个代号：“我的电池已经红格了（My battery's in the red）。” - **红电保护原则**：一旦亮起“红电”信号，双方必须立刻执行“暂停”（Time Out）。如果不按暂停，争吵持续两三个小时，只会说出更多恶毒且事后必须道歉的重话。 - **暂停的价值**：评估一段关系沟通成熟度的最高指标，就是看他们叫暂停的频率。就像运动员无法在球场上不间断奔跑三小时一样，精神也需要中场休息；哪怕只冷静5分钟，回来时也能拥有全新的视角与起点。 --- ### [02:38:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9520s) 关系的质量等于沟通的质量：如何在艰难时刻共处 Jefferson 强调，评估一段关系价值的最核心法则可以概括为一句话：关系的质量等同于沟通的质量。审视那些正在经历离婚或关系濒临崩溃的伴侣，问题往往不是出在顺境——大家在生活风平浪静、心情愉悦时都能和谐共处，致命的盲区在于他们“完全不知道如何应对负面局面”。 很多携手走过50年金婚的长者被问及幸福秘诀时，他们的答案惊人一致：长久的秘诀不是看你们在快乐时有多开心，而是看你们在艰难痛苦的境遇中能够并肩坐在一起支撑多久。在现实中，那些走向婚姻破裂的人极少是因为“不再相爱”，而是因为“停止了沟通”（They fell out of communication）。 --- ### [02:40:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9603s) 伤口是愈合到101%还是99%：建设性冲突的修复力 人们初入亲密关系时普遍抱有一种巨大的误解，以为优质关系的标志是“没有冲突”。然而随着阅历增长就会明白，长久关系的本质从来不在于冲突的多少，而在于化解冲突的方式。Steven 分享了一句令他终身难忘的名言：“预测一段关系长期健康的指标，在于每一道伤口愈合后是达到了101%的韧性，还是只恢复到99%。”每一次摩擦究竟是让关系更具抗脆弱性，还是在暗中消耗根基？ - **良性冲突深化根基**：冲突是关系成长的必然催化剂，个人的成长极少能脱离关系独自完成；不争着在每一次争吵中“论输赢”，而是通过富有成效的碰撞让彼此理解更深。 - **放弃修复与沉迷指责**：很多伴侣痛苦地把头埋在双手里，彻底丧失对话能力，是因为他们已经放弃了“修复”（Repair），转而全神贯注于“归咎”（Blame）。年复一年未被修复的积怨最终将关系摧毁殆尽。 --- ### [02:42:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9724s) 父母处理冲突的方式决定孩子的未来 最新研究表明，决定孩子身心健康的最关键因素，并非父母处于已婚还是离异状态，而是“父母应对冲突的方式”。现实中有无数父母为了孩子勉强维持婚姻，家中却充斥着恶劣的争吵与冷暴力；相反，也有不少离异父母保持着极佳的沟通边界，既不让孩子陷入两难，也绝不把孩子当成互传怨言的“信使”。这种健康的沟通模式能够从根本上扭转一个孩子整个人生的成长轨迹。 面对原生家庭的创伤，两位对谈者达成共识：人在某个阶段必须学会原谅自己的父母。父母也曾是懵懂的孩子，被他们自己的父母抚养长大，“这同样是他们第一次过人生”，不完美本就是人性的常态。 --- ### [02:43:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9781s) 《下一次对话工作手册》与量身定制的AI沟通导师 针对如何将沟通理念转化为可执行的生活习惯，Jefferson 即将推出新书配套工具《下一次对话工作手册：少些争吵，多些交谈的实用练习》（*The Next Conversation Workbook: Practical Exercises for Arguing Less and Talking More*，预计3月10日上市），通过具体的框架练习帮助读者固化沟通习惯。 与此同时，Jefferson 透露他正在打造一款专属的垂直领域小语言模型（SLM）。该 AI 深度学习了他的所有著作、播客以及社交媒体视频内容，旨在成为每个人随身携带的24小时专业沟通顾问： - **即时场景预演**：在步入高压会议前提示用户如何展现自信气场，或在伴侣情绪失控、拒绝倾听时提供即时的沟通策略。 - **对抗性角色扮演**：用户可以让 AI 模拟扮演一位“苛刻、傲慢的上司”，在安全的模拟环境中反复推演和测试不同应答方式的成效，从而找到最具力量的回应策略。 ### [02:44:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9871s) 传统提问环节：最渴望遇见的人与人生导师 按照《The Diary Of A CEO》节目的惯例，上一位接受采访的嘉宾都会为下一位嘉宾留下一道专属问题。主持人史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）翻开笔记本，向杰斐逊·费舍尔（Jefferson Fisher）念出了属于他的问题：“你现在最渴望遇见谁？为什么？”听到这个题目，杰斐逊笑着称赞这是个绝妙的问题，并在思索片刻后给出了他的答案——著名学者与作家布琳·布朗（Brené Brown）。 杰斐逊解释道，布琳·布朗在这个心理和沟通领域耕耘了很久，每次听她分享内容时，都能感受到一种由内而外的纯粹与真实（genuine），“你根本不需要去怀疑她是否真实”。史蒂文在一旁赞同，形容布琳·布朗“坦率、赤诚、真实到了极致”。除了性格上的共鸣，杰斐逊还幽默地提到他们共同的生活纽带——布朗也是德克萨斯大学长角牛队（Texas Longhorns）的忠实球迷。从更深层次的人生经历来看，杰斐逊坦言自己并非按部就班进入公众沟通这一行业，某种意义上他是被现实推到这个舞台上的；在这样的人生阶段，人们总是会在生活中寻找能够作为精神锚点（anchor）和导师的人，而布朗正是这样一位通晓世事、用广博智慧指引并帮助了无数人的楷模。 ### [02:45:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9956s) 从法庭走进大众：畅销著作的真实影响力 随着访谈进入尾声，史蒂文对杰斐逊的著作《The Next Conversation: Argue Less, Talk More》给予了极高的赞誉。他提到自己甚至将这本书选入了英国 WHSmith 的个人推荐精选系列之中。史蒂文指出，这本书之所以能取得现象级成功（smash hit success），在于它兼具了两个维度的突破：商业上的销售量与对读者生活带来的深远影响力。它完全不像那些晦涩深奥的学术专著，而是用平实、极易理解的语言，专为那些正在经历真实生活困境的普通人所写。 史蒂文特别强调，杰斐逊的独特之处在于他并没有像某些终身待在象牙塔里的学者那样“收起城桥、与世隔绝”；相反，他作为一名常年身处第一线的德州出庭律师，将实战中淬炼出的沟通技巧以极其通俗、接地气的方式传递给大众。这种真实且极富感染力的表达方式，正是杰斐逊在过去几年里迎来事业大爆发、席卷各大社交媒体平台的核心原因。史蒂文由衷地感谢杰斐逊为迷茫中的人们带来光亮，用沟通知识赋能普通人，让他们有力量去捍卫自己应得的生活。 - **畅销维度**：不仅拥有庞大的销量，更具备深度的社会影响力与普及度。 - **写作风格**：抛开繁复晦涩的理论术语，从法庭实操与真实困境切入，直击日常人际沟通痛点。 - **合作渠道**：该书被史蒂文纳入英国著名连锁书店 WHSmith 的精选推荐书系。 ### [02:47:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=10035s) 人际连接的本质与《DOAC》对话卡牌 在正式告别本期对谈后，史蒂文借由节目的核心精神分享了关于“人与人之间深度连接”的思考。他谈到，生活在当今快节奏的世界里，人们最稀缺、最迫切需要的正是真诚的连接。正如每一次他在演播室与各界嘉宾促膝长谈时，无论对方背景如何，这种深度而私密的交流总能激发出不可思议的共鸣与羁绊。 基于每期节目的“上一位嘉宾为下一位留问题”这一传统机制，团队将这些极具启发性的问题精心提炼，制作成了《The Diary Of A CEO》对话卡牌（Conversation Cards）。史蒂文介绍了全新升级的第二版卡牌，其中不仅增加了增添趣味与戏剧性的“反转卡（twist cards）”，他还首次在第一批印刷版本中限量附赠了由他本人亲自撰写独家问题的“黄金卡（Gold Card）”。他鼓励观众与身边的伴侣、家人或朋友放下手机，借由卡牌中的深度问题展开交流，重塑彼此之间失落已久的亲密连接。 ## Notable quotes > [01:45:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6309s) just as weird and terrible as everybody else — Jefferson Fisher > [01:45:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6309s) Useless absurdity will define you more than useful practicality — Steven Bartlett > [01:53:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6798s) Am I enough? — Jefferson Fisher > [01:53:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6798s) If I cannot be genuine with you, I can be nobody to you — Jefferson Fisher > [01:56:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=6995s) It felt disrespectful — Steven Bartlett > [02:04:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7452s) Instead of being a waterfall, be a well — Jefferson Fisher > [02:04:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7452s) Let your first word be your breath — Jefferson Fisher > [02:07:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7678s) Walk, don't run — Jefferson Fisher > [02:09:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=7757s) Let me think about that for a second — Jefferson Fisher > [02:19:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8373s) Thinking about you. No need to respond — Jefferson Fisher > [02:24:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8681s) I need you to say that again — Jefferson Fisher > [02:28:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=8923s) Don't have something to prove, have something to learn — Jefferson Fisher > [02:31:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9079s) Validate first, frustration comes next — Jefferson Fisher > [02:36:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9364s) My battery's in the red — Jefferson Fisher > [02:38:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8&t=9520s) They fell out of communication — Jefferson Fisher ## Mentioned Jefferson Fisher, Steven Bartlett, Sierra, Bertha, Tim, Jenny, Oliver, Samir Chaudry, Colin and Samir, Brené Brown, David Attenborough, Uber, WHSmith, The Diary Of A CEO, Texas Longhorns, The Next Conversation: Argue Less, Talk More, The Next Conversation Workbook: Practical Exercises for Arguing Less and Talking More ## Video description Trial Lawyer and leading communication expert JEFFERSON FISHER reveals how gaslighting and narcissism work, why people don’t listen to you, and the courtroom tricks for respect and power! Jefferson Fisher is a Texas trial lawyer and leading communication expert. He is the founder of Fisher Firm, creator of The Jefferson Fisher School of Communication, and author of the book, “The Next Conversation: Argue Less, Talk More”. He explains: ◼️The fastest way to spot a narcissist in under 30 seconds ◼️The phrase that instantly exposes gaslighting ◼️Why people stop respecting you mid conversation ◼️The courtroom trick that makes people listen ◼️How to control any conversation without raising your voice 00:00 Intro 02:43 These Communication Skills Will Change Your Life and Career Trajectory 09:27 How to Have Control Over Conversations 12:01 The Psychology Behind Feeling Comfortable in Any Conversation 15:29 How Your Body Language Can Influence Others’ Opinions 20:25 The Traits of Confident People 22:28 Dealing With Difficult Conversations and Gaslighters 24:25 The Words Gaslighters Use Against You 30:47 The Attachment Style Most at Risk of Being Gaslighted 39:06 This Is What Manipulators and Narcissists Do 42:42 How to Stop a Narcissist 49:02 Your Reactions Reveal So Much About You 51:09 How to Stop Being Easily Triggered 54:47 How Being Honest With People Can Help You 01:00:22 How Our Parents’ Arguments Shaped Our Love Relationships 01:15:07 Find Your Priorities and Set Your Boundaries 01:17:08 People Pleasers 01:22:49 Relationship Arguments: Can They Be Good? 01:25:11 A Big Indicator That Something Really Matters to Your Partner 01:33:06 The Secret to Spot Anyone Being Fake 01:34:46 The Fake Laughs 01:41:53 These Small Moments Will Have the Biggest Impact on Impressions 01:53:18 Top 5 Things to Become the Best Communicator at Anything 02:02:49 Phones Have Become Our Pacifier to Remove Anxiety 02:04:12 Stop Overexplaining 02:07:58 The Power of Taking Pauses to Think 02:10:38 One of the Best Traits of Leaders 02:17:31 How to Help Someone Grieving 02:26:56 The Counterattack to Bullies: Expose Them 02:34:10 Huge Relationship Unlock: Energy Checking With Your Parent 02:40:03 The Predictor If a Relationship Will Last Follow Jefferson: Instagram - https://bit.ly/4pzxZ21 Facebook - https://bit.ly/4rUhTS6 TikTok - https://bit.ly/4aihiDv YouTube - https://bit.ly/3YplSIG You can pre-order ‘The Next Conversation Workbook’, here: Hardcover - https://bit.ly/4pLpocq Paperback - https://bit.ly/44D8kgm The Diary Of A CEO: ◼️Get the 2026 Goal Setting Guide - https://bit.ly/ytgoalsettingguide ◼️Join DOAC circle here - https://doaccircle.com/ ◼️Buy The Diary Of A CEO book here - https://smarturl.it/DOACbook ◼️The 1% Diary is back - limited time only - https://bit.ly/3YFbJbt ◼️The Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards (Second Edition) - https://g2ul0.app.link/f31dsUttKKb ◼️Get email updates - https://bit.ly/diary-of-a-ceo-yt ◼️Follow Steven - https://g2ul0.app.link/gnGqL4IsKKb Sponsors: Adobe - https://Adobe.Ly/OneBetter Wispr - Get 14 days of Wispr Flow for free at https://wisprflow.ai/DOAC Stan: NO PURCHASE NECESSARY. VOID WHERE PROHIBITED. For Official Rules, visit https://DaretoDream.stan.store [Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPVdK9v0CK8)

[105:09] Jefferson Fisher: just as weird and terrible as everybody else [105:09] Steven Bartlett: Useless absurdity will define you more than useful practicality [113:18] Jefferson Fisher: Am I enough? [113:18] Jefferson Fisher: If I cannot be genuine with you, I can be nobody to you [116:35] Steven Bartlett: It felt disrespectful [124:12] Jefferson Fisher: Instead of being a waterfall, be a well [124:12] Jefferson Fisher: Let your first word be your breath [127:58] Jefferson Fisher: Walk, don't run [129:17] Jefferson Fisher: Let me think about that for a second [139:33] Jefferson Fisher: Thinking about you. No need to respond [144:41] Jefferson Fisher: I need you to say that again [148:43] Jefferson Fisher: Don't have something to prove, have something to learn [151:19] Jefferson Fisher: Validate first, frustration comes next [156:04] Jefferson Fisher: My battery's in the red [158:40] Jefferson Fisher: They fell out of communication

[0:00] Jefferson Fisher: Most relationships don't fall apart because they fell out of love. They fell out of communication because of a hundred moments where repair could have happened and it didn't. [0:00] Jefferson Fisher: If I respond first with frustration, I'm going to lose every time. [2:18] Jefferson Fisher: People think that the goal of any argument or any conversation is to win... They still wanted the apology. It all would have been resolved... if somebody had just said, 'I'm sorry.' [5:18] Jefferson Fisher: I don't need to agree with you to understand you. [7:30] Jefferson Fisher: For you to learn how to stand up for yourself, you first have to learn who's worth getting out of your chair for. [9:27] Jefferson Fisher: In conversation, everybody is looking for an anchor. When you go to a meeting, we listen to the person who's the anchor. [22:28] Jefferson Fisher: Lying is a surface level... Gaslighting is I'm trying to alter your reality into mine. I mean, I'm trying to make you question how other people perceive you, including myself, how you perceive yourself. [44:21] Jefferson Fisher: They'll dig a hole, and then they expect you to fill it... and you're exhausted because all you've been doing is trying to plug holes. You're not having a real conversation. [77:08] Jefferson Fisher: Stop being nice at the expense of being real... Nice is concerned about surface, kind is worried about connection. [85:11] Jefferson Fisher: If it's hysterical, it's historical. [101:53] Steven Bartlett: Useless absurdity will define you more than useful practicality. [124:18] Jefferson Fisher: Instead of being a waterfall, be a well. [125:38] Jefferson Fisher: Let your first word be your breath. [144:41] Jefferson Fisher: Did you mean for that to sound rude?

[0:00] What are the five most important things [0:02] for anyone who's striving to be a [0:03] masterful communicator to get what they [0:06] want out of life? The first is [0:08] authenticity. [0:09] >> And presence is the highest form of [0:11] authenticity. [0:11] >> Okay, on that point, I'm going to play [0:13] this video on the screen that went viral [0:15] of Miley Cyrus and Naomi Campbell. [0:16] >> I haven't seen that. [0:19] That's painful to watch. Number two, [0:21] reduce the amount of distraction. Three, [0:24] stop over explain. Number four, know how [0:27] to deal with their sadness. And I'll go [0:29] through all of these in detail. But [0:31] number five is you have to know how to [0:33] handle the narcissist and the [0:35] gaslighter. What do I do? Let me show [0:37] you. First, you need to Bam. Yeah, for a [0:40] lot of people that kind of blows their [0:42] mind. Jefferson Fisher is back and the [0:44] board certified trial lawyer is using [0:46] his expertise in conflict resolution and [0:48] communication to teach couples, friends, [0:51] employees, and everyone in between how [0:53] to master difficult conversations. [0:55] Here's the truth, you have to invest in [0:57] your communication. If I don't say what [0:59] needs [music] to be said at work, I'll [1:00] lose that promotion. Same thing in [1:02] relationships. Most relationships don't [1:04] fall apart because they fell out of [1:05] love. They fell out of communication [1:07] because of a hundred moments where [1:09] repair could have happened and it [1:10] didn't. Because you said, "Ah, this is [1:11] so stupid. This is so small." Like [1:13] there's a recent study showing that the [1:14] biggest predictor of the child's [1:16] well-being within the parental [1:17] relationship is not whether they were [1:19] married or divorced. It was how they [1:20] deal with conflict. But people are [1:23] definitely afraid of the conflict that [1:25] they're in cuz they don't know what to [1:25] say. And so I want to help them feel [1:27] controlled in this, feel confident in [1:29] this. And it's knowing things like being [1:31] right is overrated. Or if I respond [1:32] first with frustration, I'm going to [1:34] lose every time. Or if you want to know [1:36] how to handle the insults, the [1:38] patronizing, the dismissive, first thing [1:40] you have to do is [1:43] That's the mistake I've made multiple [1:44] times. [1:47] I see messages all the time in the [1:49] comment section that some of you didn't [1:50] realize you didn't subscribe. So if you [1:52] could do me a favor and double check if [1:54] you're a subscriber to this channel, [1:55] that would be tremendously appreciated. [1:56] It's the simple, it's the free thing [1:58] that anybody that watches this very [2:00] frequently can do to help us here to [2:01] keep everything going in this show in [2:03] the trajectory it's on. So please do [2:05] double check if you subscribed and thank [2:07] you so much because in a strange way you [2:09] are you're part of our history and [2:11] you're on this journey with us and I [2:12] appreciate you for that. So yeah, thank [2:14] you. [2:16] >> [music] [2:17] [singing] [2:18] >> Jefferson Fisher. [2:20] What do you do professionally? [2:23] What is your How do you sort of [2:24] characterize your profession? [2:26] Well, I'm a trial attorney by trade. [2:28] What does that mean? [2:29] It means I help clients with legal [2:32] needs. I'm board certified in personal [2:34] injury. So when people get hurt, I [2:37] have trials. So I That means there are [2:39] other attorneys that don't ever go to a [2:41] courtroom. I go into a courtroom. [2:43] >> And you stand before a judge. And a [2:45] bailiff. Yeah, you have a judge, have a [2:47] jury, have a court reporter, a bailiff, [2:49] have opposing attorneys. There are [2:51] people in the room. And you try and [2:52] convince those people of your point of [2:54] view to get a particular outcome. I [2:56] advocate my client's facts in order to [2:58] get the result that they want. So why [3:00] did you think it was important to write [3:01] a book about conversation, talking, [3:05] getting what you want from [3:08] the conversations we have with people we [3:09] care about? [3:10] Because I have seen time and time again [3:12] that [3:13] when I am training a client is what I [3:15] call. I'm preparing them for [3:16] cross-examination, for deposition, they [3:19] really don't know how to engage in [3:22] conflict. And so [3:23] I can't think of any other profession [3:25] that is more entrenched in conflict [3:28] maybe outside of a a boxer or some, you [3:31] know, UFC something that deals with [3:33] actual conflict and sits there and [3:36] listens to it all than in the legal [3:38] world and a trial attorney. And so yeah, [3:40] it's my job to advocate based on my [3:42] client's facts to [3:44] to get them the result that they want. [3:45] The reason why I wrote that book and how [3:47] that book applies is I took a lot of the [3:49] lessons that I teach every one of my [3:52] clients and put them in that book [3:54] because I'm sitting there preparing them [3:55] for cross-examination and realizing, "Oh [3:58] wait, they are deathly afraid of the [4:01] conflict that they're in." Cuz most of [4:02] the time [4:03] it's the most [4:05] emotional, stressful, overwhelmed they [4:09] are ever in their life. They've They're [4:11] in a place they've never been. They [4:12] don't know what it's like. They've only [4:14] seen it on TV. And so it's my job to [4:16] kind of take their hand and say, "This [4:18] is how we're going to [4:19] This is how we're going to do it." And [4:21] how does that apply to the average [4:22] person in their life? People think that [4:26] the goal of any argument or any [4:28] conversation is to win. [4:30] And same for a trial. They say you want [4:33] to win a trial. I've seen it so many [4:35] times where I've gotten the result that [4:36] they want and I've [4:37] and realized they still have the [4:39] problem. They still wanted the apology. [4:41] I It all would have been resolved. [4:43] There'd be no case if somebody had just [4:44] said, "I'm sorry." [4:46] Yeah, and so you find that [4:48] for the everyday person [4:51] it's my job now and and passion to be [4:53] able to help them [4:56] get into conflict and say, "I feel [4:58] controlled in this. I feel confident in [5:00] this. Now I know exactly where I'm going [5:03] in this because I've been there before." [5:05] And it is not [5:06] a skill that comes naturally. It is a [5:08] skill that is learned. [5:11] And what do you think is the [5:13] the sort of variance in outcome? How [5:15] would my life change if I became an [5:17] absolute master in this? [5:19] You know, if if I started from zero in [5:21] this regard and then I became a master [5:23] in dealing with conflict and dealing [5:25] with difficult people and dealing with [5:26] people that gaslight me and dealing with [5:28] narcissists and all these kinds of [5:29] things. [5:30] Why would my life be different? And and [5:32] in what domains? [5:34] It's quite a lot. Yeah. First would be [5:36] you would be equipped for [5:39] outside of necessary expertise anywhere [5:42] you wanted to be in life. [5:44] People will feel like communication is [5:47] zero cost. It costs you something. If [5:50] I'm not speaking up in that relationship [5:52] it costs my own sense of worth. If I [5:55] don't say what needs to be said at work, [5:57] I might have lost that promotion. I I I [6:00] everything The bill always comes due. If [6:03] you can think of every time you didn't [6:05] say the thing [6:06] as like a receipt at a restaurant. Every [6:09] time it's [6:10] it's a bill of what I am not putting [6:12] into my life because I chose to either [6:15] say something or not say something at [6:17] the right time. And when you realize [6:18] that if I can speak with confidence [6:21] well, that's me gaining a little bit [6:23] more. If if I can say things with [6:25] control, that's me gaining just a little [6:27] bit more. A second benefit of it is that [6:30] you realize [6:32] being right is overrated. [6:35] You can If you tell me the sky is purple [6:38] knock yourself out, Stephen. It doesn't [6:40] have to touch anything with me on on who [6:43] I am or any of my opinions. We're we're [6:44] opinion-making machines. I feel That's [6:47] all on social media. It's just be set up [6:49] to give your opinion on things that most [6:52] of the time will rarely ever touch you. [6:55] And if you can have the peace of mind of [6:57] knowing [6:59] I don't need to agree with you to [7:01] understand you. [7:03] If you have an opinion, I don't have to [7:05] give one back. [7:06] If you say something [7:08] I can choose not to say anything at all. [7:10] And for a lot of people that kind of [7:12] blows their mind of You mean I don't [7:14] have to respond? No, you don't have to [7:16] re-say anything. If somebody's talking [7:18] really fast, you can talk really slow. [7:20] They forget that you have full autonomy [7:23] in it. And when you realize that it's [7:25] you who's taking the wheel you take the [7:27] wheel of your life. [7:30] But what about justice? Jefferson. Yeah. [7:33] Do you know justice? Like this person [7:35] has wronged me, they've said something [7:37] wrong, they've I don't know, they [7:38] tweeted at me something which is [7:40] incorrect. I need to correct the record. [7:42] Justice. I think we all have a sort of [7:44] an innate sense of [7:47] justice. We want things to be fair and [7:49] right. Yes. Justice is an inherent value [7:53] that is high priority for a lot of [7:55] people for good reason. You might say, [7:57] "Well, they've they've wronged me. This [7:59] isn't right." [8:00] That's all well and good. The question [8:02] is going to be how long do you want to [8:03] carry it? [8:05] How long do you want to carry that [8:06] feeling? Because I can either choose to [8:09] let it go. I can choose to say the [8:10] thing. [8:11] It's it's not at all my position that [8:13] you should be stepping on eggshells and [8:16] not say the thing and and be a [8:17] wallflower. No, it's the opposite. I'm [8:19] saying you you say what you need to say [8:22] in a way that is controlled, in a way [8:24] that is signaling [8:26] I don't I'm saying this because it needs [8:28] to be said but not because I have to say [8:31] it. [8:31] There's a lot of people who feel like, [8:33] "Well, something needs to be said." But [8:35] am I [8:36] Maybe you're not the one to say it. [8:38] Maybe you you're the one that needs to [8:40] I mean, it doesn't need to be said right [8:42] now because if they're not willing to [8:44] listen, well then what good does it ever [8:46] do? [8:47] What I like to say is [8:49] you know [8:50] for you to learn how to stand up for [8:52] yourself, you first have to learn who's [8:54] worth getting out of your chair for. [8:56] Yeah, I'm not going to be [8:57] making big moves for something that is [9:01] not at all worth my my time. So yeah, [9:04] justice is absolutely worth it. But when [9:06] you go [9:08] I'm the one that has to be carrying [9:09] this. [9:10] A lot of times people do things to you [9:12] and it's nothing to them. [9:14] But yet it's everything to you. And now [9:15] you just you're walking around for 20 [9:17] years with a comment that you could have [9:20] said something way long ago and decided [9:22] to drop it. But you you chose to to [9:24] carry it. And now you're the only one [9:26] that has to the weight of that. If I'm [9:28] dealing with someone who's in a position [9:29] of power [9:30] someone who's a I don't know, a senior [9:32] to me at my company or even someone who [9:34] in my social group is a bit more higher [9:36] up in the sort of social pecking order [9:38] and they're continually putting me down [9:39] or being difficult or even a partner [9:41] that I'm romantically involved in. What [9:43] are the hallmarks of someone who has [9:45] control of over their communication and [9:46] what are the hallmarks of someone that [9:48] doesn't? Like what is it that makes Cuz [9:50] when you speak, it's very feels very [9:52] composed and controlled. What are you [9:54] intentionally doing to achieve that [9:56] effect? [9:58] I'm wanting you to match my rhythm. [10:00] I'm wanting you to come to my frequency. [10:03] People get it wrong when they go big [10:04] time to an 11, a big emotional reaction. [10:07] If I have a big emotional outburst, am I [10:09] signaling that I'm somebody who's [10:11] trustworthy, reliable, and confident? Or [10:14] am I signaling that I am [10:16] out of my depth, I don't know what I [10:18] want, and I am [10:20] not to be believed. All right, because [10:22] it's when you have an emotional [10:24] outburst, everybody thinks this is [10:25] you're just being emotional. And they [10:28] don't All of a sudden, you're not [10:30] credited for the truth of what you're [10:32] saying. So, sometimes emotions can get [10:34] in the way of what needs to be said [10:37] because of how you're delivering it. So, [10:39] when I say [10:41] I'm going to talk to you in a way that's [10:42] going to sound more controlled, it's I'm [10:44] slowing down my words, I'm lowering my [10:46] volume. Why? Because I want to pull you [10:48] down here. [10:51] And if I can pull you down here, well, [10:52] then we can talk about a lot harder [10:54] things rather than feeling like I have [10:57] to to rush. So, if you want to talk to [10:59] somebody in your relationship or [11:00] somebody that's kind of higher up on the [11:02] pecking order, so to speak, when you can [11:04] show them that [11:07] change doesn't bother you, when you can [11:09] show them that [11:11] you don't have to rush through this [11:13] situation, [11:14] people feel that you are giving them a [11:18] sense of comfort. In other words, in [11:20] conversation, everybody is looking for [11:22] an anchor. [11:24] When you go to a meeting, we listen to [11:25] the person who's the anchor. They're [11:28] usually the person who says a lot less. [11:30] The person who's observing and listening [11:31] rather than always giving their opinion [11:33] about what you should be doing. [11:35] Those are the people you don't listen [11:37] to. As soon as you as if you've ever [11:38] heard somebody say, "You know what I [11:39] think you should do." Does that ever [11:41] make you want to do what they said? No, [11:44] it's because they they've made it their [11:46] idea. Now they're telling you what to [11:48] do. If I were to say to you, "You can't [11:50] do that." [11:51] What's the first thing you think of? [11:53] Yes, I can. [11:55] You know, it's it's the same kind of [11:56] concept where it's me lowering [11:59] to be the anchor in the conversation. [12:01] And when you're in a [12:02] case in front of a judge, is is there [12:05] anything else that you're intentionally [12:06] thinking about with I don't know, your [12:07] body language or the eye contact or any [12:10] of these other things that you've [12:11] learned over time are really important [12:13] to get your message heard? [12:15] I'm speaking like I've been there [12:16] before. Explain that to me. Walk into a [12:18] room like you've been there before. [12:20] As if everybody else is just visiting. [12:23] So, what I do before every trial [12:25] is I will go in there before the jury [12:28] comes in, the judge comes in, everybody [12:30] comes in. And I say to myself, [12:33] "This is my living room, and everybody [12:34] else is just visiting." [12:36] And so, I will touch the chairs. I will [12:39] put my hands on the banisters. I will [12:42] walk around. I will fill that space [12:45] and and feel it in a way of saying, "I [12:48] am have been here before." [12:50] And when I can exude that kind of [12:52] confidence, that every juror that [12:54] watches [12:56] all of a sudden it calms them down. They [12:57] go, "Who can I rely on here? Who's more [12:59] trustworthy? Who's more credible?" [13:02] Because that's what it is. When you're [13:03] when you're [13:05] persuading, when you are advocating your [13:07] case, it's who ultimately comes down to [13:09] who is more credible. And so, when I can [13:13] not get emotionally flustered. Like I've [13:15] seen it so many times where [13:18] a judge rules against me. [13:21] And [13:23] I act as though that's exactly what I [13:24] wanted. [13:25] You know, I I am I'm acting as though, [13:28] "Thank you, Judge." And the the jury's [13:30] never going to know really any [13:32] different. But I've seen on other [13:33] attorneys where the judge rules against [13:35] them and they go [13:37] >> [sighs] [13:38] >> or they roll their eyes, or they act [13:39] frustrated. And what does the juror [13:40] think? "Oh, they must not have wanted me [13:42] to hear this information. [13:44] Oh, this must have been bad for their [13:45] case." So, if you are always reacting to [13:48] situations in which you have to be [13:51] emotional with in a sense that you're [13:54] not paying attention to who's [13:56] watching you. Okay, so on that point [13:58] >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. So, when you say rules [14:00] against you, you mean during the trial [14:02] there's something you request, the judge [14:04] might say no, and you say thank you, [14:05] Judge. Yeah. [14:06] >> You act as if you're not defeated. You [14:08] act as though that's exactly what you [14:09] expected. [14:11] All right, it's it's the whole idea of [14:13] that's not going to shake shake me. So, [14:16] a lot of the times you'll see in real [14:18] court, not TV, [14:19] uh the judge will say, "Counsel, can you [14:21] approach?" And both attorneys come up [14:23] and they play some kind of noise [14:24] cancellation to where only the the [14:26] attorneys can hear the judge. And the [14:28] judge is making a decision at that time [14:30] that we don't want to hear to let the [14:31] jury know. Why? Because it's information [14:33] that might sway the case in some way and [14:36] not be as objective. [14:38] And you have to pay attention to who's [14:40] how the attorneys are walking away after [14:42] that meeting's done. If somebody looks [14:43] defeated, it just signals, "Oh, this is [14:45] information that they must not want." Or [14:49] they're objecting. [14:50] I've seen so many cases where [14:53] there's one attorney who objects to [14:54] everything. [14:56] It's my rule if I really want to have [14:58] one objection [14:59] the whole trial. [15:00] Because to the jury, an objection is me [15:03] keeping evidence out. So, if you always [15:05] object, always object, always object, [15:07] you're just signaling there's [15:08] information I don't want you to hear. [15:09] But if I have the confidence of knowing [15:12] there's really one objection I know [15:13] that's going to be material to my case, [15:16] the way they know I've been there [15:18] before. This is not something that's [15:20] going to be making or breaking my case. [15:22] It's it's all of credibility. If they [15:25] don't trust me, [15:26] they're not going to trust my client or [15:28] my client's case. I think also it [15:30] illuminates to me how much of [15:31] communication is nonverbal because in [15:33] that example you're just talking about [15:35] how they're watching your body language [15:36] and how you've received something. [15:38] Right. [15:39] >> And there, you know, if you were [15:40] defensive, you know, with all those [15:42] objections, or if you were defeated in [15:43] the [15:44] judge's ruling, Mhm. that would work [15:47] against you even though it's really [15:49] nothing was said, like nothing [15:50] significant was said. [15:51] Yeah, it's it's a balance of knowing [15:56] am I going to [15:59] choose to react because of personal ego [16:01] if I didn't get my way, [16:03] or am I having the better mindset of I'm [16:05] advocating on behalf of my client. Like [16:08] I I've been Let's say you're a witness [16:11] and you're opposed to me, and I'm asking [16:14] you a question. And I think you said [16:15] something that's contrary contrary to [16:17] the evidence that I have right here. [16:19] Rather than me getting messed up saying, [16:21] "Are you Are you sure about that, Mr. [16:22] Barlow? Let me go You know, I have this [16:23] piece of paper here." And I get really [16:25] worked up versus me putting You said [16:28] something and I put my hand on the the [16:29] paper. I said, [16:31] "You sure?" [16:32] Like all of a sudden it's a moment of [16:35] it kind of peaks their interest of like, [16:36] "What's happening? Oh, this attorney [16:38] knows. This attorney is somebody who's [16:41] confident [16:42] and has this what I call in the pocket [16:45] presence. I'm not trying to be too [16:47] forward. I'm not trying to be too back. [16:48] I'm just in the pocket like a a jazz [16:50] band. Like everybody is on everybody's [16:53] on beat. And so, I'm not I'm not [16:55] rushing. I'm not slowing down. I'm just [16:57] right in the pocket. In the pocket. Is [16:59] that what people call aura? [17:01] Swagger? Maybe it's some people call it. [17:03] Yeah, aura. It you you could have it for [17:05] anything in any context. I like to say [17:07] in the pocket cuz it just reminds me of [17:11] the right timing is my timing. And that [17:14] is I'm I'm going to match [17:16] how I need to be of what's most [17:19] authentic, what's most genuine to me. If [17:21] you were to ask me to read something [17:22] really fast, it wouldn't sound that [17:24] great because that's not that's not my [17:26] personality. [17:27] And so, if I know that I am acting and [17:29] speaking in accordance with the values [17:31] that I hold, and I'm saying everybody [17:34] here is just is just visiting. This is [17:36] I've been here before. Let me Y'all [17:38] don't know where to go? Let me show you. [17:40] And I I have that kind of mentality, [17:43] people will listen to you forever. [17:46] They'll they'll find that attractive [17:47] saying, "How does this person know where [17:49] they're going? Well, I can I can follow [17:51] them." It's just it's natural leadership [17:53] to speak in a way that says I know where [17:55] I've I'm going. I've been here before. I [17:58] think that's probably good advice for [17:59] people who have important meetings or [18:02] are going on dates. Yeah. To maybe get [18:04] there ahead of time and familiarize [18:05] yourself with the location. Yes. Just so [18:07] you, you know, you don't have the added [18:09] anxiety of like stumbling through the [18:11] physical environment Right. like looking [18:13] for the thing or trying to find the [18:14] toilet or Exactly. I don't know, trying [18:16] to figure out how to make the PowerPoint [18:17] presentation air drop onto the screen [18:19] and all those kinds of things which [18:20] we've all seen before. Yeah. I always [18:22] anytime I go to speak, um I I spoke this [18:25] past week uh in Santa Barbara. [18:28] I went ahead of time before my speaking [18:30] time to to go I want to see what the [18:32] room looks like. I want to see [18:34] how how can I touch and say hi to the [18:36] people that are working AV? How can I [18:37] meet them? How can I If you really want [18:39] to be better as a professional speaker, [18:42] talk to people in the crowd before you [18:43] speak. Mhm. Get to know people's names. [18:46] It's going to naturally lower you. Get [18:49] to know their names. Ask them why [18:50] they're here. Say, "I'm so thankful that [18:52] you're here. I'm really looking forward [18:53] to the message and getting to talk to [18:55] you today." When you when you can go in [18:56] and touch people, [18:58] it's a different sense than if I'm going [19:00] into a room totally [19:02] cold cuz you don't really have the vibe. [19:04] You don't really know how that is. So, [19:05] yeah, going into a restaurant ahead of [19:06] time, [19:07] that's great. Not bringing your phone, [19:09] even better. You know, getting able to [19:11] be a sense of knowing [19:14] I I've been here before. I want to [19:16] welcome you to to my space. [19:19] When we talk about people that have [19:20] aura, you must have met a lot of people [19:22] in your career and your life generally [19:23] that you felt had a sense of aura. [19:25] Yes. [19:27] What was it about them [19:29] that gave them that aura? [19:31] What is it? [19:32] It's a frequency of [19:36] peace [19:37] for me. [19:38] I think of people and you think of [19:40] people in your life [19:42] who you have felt most [19:45] comfortable with. The person you feel [19:47] like I I can just be myself. I can [19:49] finally let everything down. And for me [19:51] it was my my grandparents' house. [19:54] As soon as I walk in, it's a different [19:56] feeling of time kind of stands still. [20:00] They want to know about me. They want to [20:01] know how I'm [20:03] doing. They It's It's that feeling. I [20:06] could talk about people who seem like [20:07] they have aura and they just have a a [20:09] glow about them. It's usually of [20:13] They're not trying to prove anything to [20:15] anybody. They just naturally exude that [20:18] kind of charisma because [20:21] the security of knowing who they are [20:24] and what they can do. [20:26] And I guess what What's the opposite of [20:27] that then? Sometimes it's easier to [20:28] understand something by understanding [20:30] the opposite. [20:31] What would that look like? [20:33] I would say that [20:35] authentic people [20:37] authentic aura, as you said, [20:40] doesn't come from people [20:43] securing themselves to you. [20:45] That's for insecure people. [20:48] The people who are authentic know that [20:51] I am good exactly where I'm at. Oh, you [20:54] want to rush? I'm I'm really no rush. [20:56] I'm What happens today happens today. Is [20:59] it really due today or could it be done [21:01] tomorrow if I I had to? If it's a slower [21:04] pace, [21:05] I I find that [21:07] there is so much kind of what they call [21:09] cowboy wisdom on these kind of things [21:12] where [21:13] and I'm from Texas in the South, so it's [21:15] it's kind of this [21:17] knowing that the right time will come [21:19] when that time is right. [21:21] And not having to push that. So, if you [21:23] want to look at the opposite, it's the [21:24] it's The opposite of aura is [21:28] insecure. It's name-dropping. It's [21:31] having to be friends immediately. It's [21:33] having to [21:34] prove to you how much money I have or [21:36] what [21:37] It's everything else [21:40] being everything to everybody else [21:41] except myself. [21:44] Like, people who have a sense of style, [21:46] their own sense of style, [21:48] naturally have an aura. Why? Because [21:49] they don't care what in the world [21:51] anybody else is wearing. This is what I [21:52] like. [21:53] My daughter, all right, she's 6. [21:56] We tried setting out clothes. [21:59] Forget [snorts] it. She She can come [22:00] down in [22:02] a leopard print tutu and her sunglasses [22:04] and whatever she wants. And you know [22:05] what? She thinks she's the flyest thing [22:07] in the world. I mean, that's [22:09] I never want to take that out of her. [22:11] The people who have a sense of fashion, [22:14] the sense of who I am, [22:16] and it they didn't have to look cool to [22:17] anybody's social standard, but it's [22:20] Do they really care what anybody else [22:22] thinks? Usually people with aura do not. [22:27] And sometimes when you come up against I [22:29] mean, we were talking before we started [22:31] recording about since of this book's [22:33] publication, [22:35] what have been people saying to you? And [22:36] what have the chapters um What are the [22:38] chapters that have stood out the most to [22:39] people? And you mentioned that it tends [22:40] to be things around dealing with [22:43] difficult conversations, dealing with [22:44] difficult people. All right. [22:46] >> And one of the phrases that's been [22:48] arguably overused a lot in society is [22:50] this phrase gaslighting. [22:52] Yeah. And the definition of gaslighting [22:54] that I managed to pull was gaslighting [22:56] is psychological manipulation where one [22:58] person purposefully lies or manipulates [22:59] the other to make them doubt their own [23:01] reality, memory, or sanity. Mhm. Do [23:04] people talk to you about gaslighting a [23:06] lot [23:07] Yes. [23:07] >> now that you've written this book? Yes. [23:09] And what do you think gaslighting is? It [23:11] It's one of those things that's been [23:12] used so often that we almost have to [23:13] like pause for a second just to define [23:14] it again. Yes. Let me put it this way. [23:17] The difference between [23:19] gaslighting and lying. [23:21] Lying is a surface level of [23:25] Mhm. [23:26] I could tell you instead of having a [23:28] silver cup, this is a red cup. Well, [23:30] that would be a lie. [23:32] Gaslighting is I'm trying to alter your [23:36] reality into mine. I mean, I'm trying to [23:39] make you question [23:40] how other people perceive you, including [23:43] myself, how you perceive yourself. If [23:46] anybody's ever questioned, "Am I crazy? [23:48] Am I the crazy one? Is it Is it me? Is [23:50] it Is it everybody?" Most likely, you're [23:53] probably being [23:54] gaslit. And here's the truth. [23:57] I have been the gaslighter. [23:59] Everybody has been the gaslighter, [24:02] whether they intentionally know it or [24:03] not, because it's all that feeling of [24:07] preservation, of defensiveness, of I [24:09] don't want people to know the truth of [24:12] of what's happening in my life, so I'm [24:14] going to mislead. In gaslighting, the [24:17] intent is to alter your reality, to make [24:20] you question [24:21] what is real and what is not. [24:25] So, I might do something wrong and then [24:26] I might come home. I know that I've done [24:28] something wrong and intentionally try [24:30] and sell my partner a version of reality [24:33] that makes them fundamentally question [24:34] what they know to try and spare me the [24:37] critique or to [24:39] control them. Yes. To protect yourself. [24:42] It's It's It's self-preservation. [24:44] Say Let's say you and your partner uh [24:46] come home from a a dinner, all right, [24:48] and you're just in a very critical mood. [24:50] And maybe you're trying to [24:52] to distract from something else that's [24:54] going on in your life. [24:55] And you're being critical of a story [24:57] that she shared at dinner. You're like, [25:00] "Why did you Why would you ever say [25:01] that?" And she goes, "E- Everything was [25:03] fine." You're like, "Fine? No No, it was [25:05] not. Did you not see how they reacted? [25:07] No, no, no, no. [25:08] Listen. [25:10] I know you don't want to hear this, but [25:12] everybody feels that [25:14] you know, you're a little bit [25:16] much. You know, and [25:20] all of a sudden starting to alter [25:22] how she feels in that moment. And I've [25:25] seen the the other side of that, and it [25:27] is it is not at all [25:29] something that you can come back from [25:31] without serious relationship work to be [25:34] able to [25:36] find a way to say, "Okay, what's How are [25:38] we really walking in truth?" Because you [25:40] get so far away from radical honesty in [25:42] conversation. So, gaslighting is is is [25:45] not something to be taken lightly, but I [25:47] will say people often apply it to the [25:49] wrong thing. [25:50] They'll use it as a sense of saying, [25:53] "You're saying something I don't like, [25:54] so you're gaslighting me." [25:56] You know, we're in an argument and [25:57] you're pointing out something that hurt [25:58] your feelings. Oh, that's gaslighting. [26:00] You know, and they and they they they [26:02] use it as an excuse. It's almost a form [26:04] of gaslighting. Exactly. That's exactly [26:06] right. And it In a weird way, it can [26:08] reverse that way. But imagine me saying [26:10] something hurtful to you and you go, [26:12] "That really hurt my feelings." I go, [26:13] "Well, that's just my boundary. I just [26:15] have a boundary about everything." Or [26:16] this is you're just gaslighting me. You [26:18] know, I've never met somebody who talked [26:20] about their ex without saying my [26:22] narcissistic ex. You know, I finally [26:24] just got out of a narcissistic [26:25] relationship. It's never us, right? It's [26:28] always the other It's always the other [26:29] person. And so, there's these words that [26:32] we can kind of pepper and salt in the [26:34] sentences [26:35] that are also still another form, if we [26:37] look at it, a form of self-preservation. [26:39] Look at all their bad and don't look at [26:41] mine. [26:42] Why is it important that we don't [26:43] gaslight others? And I I ask this [26:44] question because [26:46] everybody listening now is probably [26:47] going to want the the answer to the [26:48] question, which is what What do I do [26:50] about a gaslighter? Yeah. But again, [26:52] this is [26:53] avoiding the responsibility that we all [26:55] have a like a tendency or at some point [26:58] in our life have gaslit somebody else. [27:00] >> Yes. And [27:01] you know, [27:02] I don't think my audience is just [27:05] the gaslighted. [27:07] >> [laughter] [27:07] >> Yeah. [27:07] >> what I mean? Statistically, clearly [27:08] you're you're also all the gaslighters. [27:10] Right. So, how do um [27:13] Why is it important that we don't [27:14] gaslight other people? And is there a [27:15] way for us to avoid, [27:18] you know, getting into situation where [27:19] our our backs are against the wall and [27:20] we end up gaslighting someone? [27:22] It's important not to gaslight somebody [27:25] because every time you do, you're [27:28] removing [27:29] yourself further and further from the [27:31] truth. [27:32] The truth of how you feel, the truth of [27:34] your relationship. You are withholding [27:37] reality [27:39] from that other person, rather than [27:41] having radical radical honesty about [27:43] what's what's happening. So, it it [27:44] degrades the relationship. It degrades [27:47] another person's self-worth. And in many [27:48] ways, [27:50] gaslighting steals [27:52] their reality. [27:55] It's not something you can give back [27:57] without a lot of work. It It's It's [27:59] taking in some sense. Now, it can be [28:01] absolutely [28:04] intentional, and it can also be [28:06] unintentional as a form of [28:07] self-preservation. [28:09] And if you feel like you are being [28:11] gaslit, [28:13] the secret to knowing [28:15] is [28:16] slowing down the conversation. [28:18] If I am [28:21] staying still [28:23] in the conversation, meaning you could [28:24] say something to me [28:26] that's a form of gaslighting, making me [28:28] question, "Did I Oh my goodness, did I [28:29] really say that? Did I really hurt their [28:30] feelings? Oh, I Did I?" [28:32] And get into my head, [28:35] and I start kind of jumping around and [28:36] trying to change what I did. But if I [28:38] were to say, [28:40] "Steven, I remember that differently." [28:43] And that's where I stop. [28:45] Then you can try other things, and I'm [28:47] going to repeat, [28:49] "Yeah, I remember that differently." [28:51] I It's standing in the truth of what you [28:53] know, rather than being concerned [28:56] and misled [28:58] by giving someone the reins and the [29:00] leash to drag you around. [29:03] And if I am [29:04] if I think about I think it's thinking [29:06] about all the times where I've I think I [29:07] might have gas- gaslit someone, [29:10] you know, in relationships, backs [29:11] against the wall, um [29:14] and you're having an argument with [29:15] someone or [29:17] it's it's quite difficult in my head to [29:18] know the difference between the word [29:19] like just saying something that isn't [29:20] necessarily true or is that Is your [29:22] perception of things versus like [29:24] gaslighting? [29:26] Is the Is the difference in your mind [29:27] intention? Like, is if I say if I give [29:30] my version of reality, Yeah. uh we were [29:32] at that party, you said this thing, I [29:35] saw the person roll their eyes, and then [29:36] they walked away. I think they're really [29:37] offended. I think you offended them. [29:39] Right. What's the difference between [29:40] that and me gaslighting someone? [29:43] Of between lying and gaslighting or is [29:45] >> Yeah, like I'm trying to understand in [29:46] that in that context you gave about [29:48] going to a party someone said something [29:49] and then they walk up. What's the [29:50] difference between if that's how you saw [29:53] reality and you're communicating it [29:55] versus gaslighting someone? It's to the [29:57] intention. It's the intention. [29:58] >> And the intention is I'm the one in [30:01] control, not you. Okay. So you are [30:03] trying to control the narrative. [30:06] You are trying to be both director, [30:09] producer, and actor. For your own [30:11] agenda. That's right. For your own film. [30:13] And for control. I'm I'm the character [30:15] in my own movie. I am the main [30:16] character. [30:17] And [30:19] you need to behave this way. You need to [30:21] believe this. You need to act upon that. [30:25] And so the more I can try to [30:28] manipulate that reality [30:30] and what's so wild is [30:33] it becomes so manipulated that you [30:35] believe it, too. [30:37] Now now that that falsehood is now [30:39] become your fact. [30:41] In some sense, that the really good [30:42] liars convince themselves that that lie [30:45] is [30:46] is the truth. Is there a certain type of [30:48] person that's more susceptible to being [30:50] gaslit or to being victimized in any way [30:53] with conversation in your view? Anxious [30:55] attachment. The ones that are they [30:59] people who can't regulate by themselves. [31:01] They have to coregulate. [31:03] Meaning [31:05] most of the time men are we're good [31:09] self-regulators. Just give me some time [31:12] by myself. [31:13] Give me an evening. [31:15] Give me an hour. [31:17] Let me walk outside and I'll and I'll [31:18] regulate myself. [31:21] Most of the time it's been my experience [31:23] women are not like that. They [31:24] coregulate, most of them. They they need [31:27] you [31:28] to also make them feel good. They can't [31:30] be good if you're not good. We're not [31:32] good. [31:33] I'm not good if if you're not okay. [31:36] So it's it's that whole I'm not okay if [31:37] you're not okay. And so in many ways [31:41] they need you to be able to [31:43] calm down themselves. [31:45] And they they don't self-regulate as [31:48] well. And so [31:50] the people who are most susceptible to [31:51] gaslighting are ones who need [31:54] coregulation. [31:55] People who are anxious anxious [31:57] attachment. Meaning they they need are [32:01] you okay? Are you good? Do you need [32:02] anything? Are you Are you sure you're [32:03] not okay? [32:04] And [32:06] versus the people who are more avoidant. [32:09] And three, the the people who are [32:10] typically more insecure. So do you think [32:12] women get gaslit more than men? [32:14] Yes. [32:17] But women still gaslight women, right? [32:19] Of course. But just men are more [32:21] >> When you're talking relationships, when [32:23] you're talking relationships, that's my [32:24] personal opinion. It's because [32:26] from my feedback from the people that [32:28] have [32:29] read my book and the people who give me [32:31] feedback on my book. [32:32] Yeah, it's majority vast majority are [32:35] are women. I'm not saying that's some [32:37] empirical study on it, but what I will [32:39] say is [32:41] women are just as capable [32:44] of gaslighting. [32:48] And get women can certainly gaslight [32:49] women and it's [32:51] I'm saying this with the mindset of [32:54] everybody gaslights whether they know it [32:57] or not and they have in the past and [32:58] most likely they can think of a time in [33:00] the past where they did [33:02] without knowing it. [33:04] But it is that would be my opinion that [33:06] most of the time men are the ones that [33:08] do it to women. I was reading some [33:10] research here that says multiple studies [33:11] on emotional abuse in heterosexual [33:13] relationships show women report higher [33:14] rates of gaslighting and coercive [33:16] control than men. Men do report [33:19] gaslighting, too, but less frequently [33:21] and usually in different forms. [33:23] Um and if [33:24] as it relates to workplace data, surveys [33:26] from management and organizational [33:27] psychology show women are more likely to [33:29] have their competence questioned, their [33:30] memory doubted, or their experience [33:33] dismissed. [33:35] Women in male-dominated fields report [33:37] the highest rates of gaslighting and [33:39] women of color report even higher rates [33:41] of being told their perception is wrong [33:43] or misinterpret or that they're [33:44] misinterpreting things. [33:47] Sounds like that tracks. [33:50] And also in medical settings, women are [33:52] less likely to be to be believed about [33:54] their symptoms. [33:55] Women's pain is underestimated. Women [33:58] get later diagnoses for multiple [33:59] conditions like heart disease and [34:00] autoimmune disorders, ADHD, and autism. [34:03] And the list goes on and on and on. [34:06] If I had to say who does more, you know, [34:09] I'm not trying to put some kind of like [34:11] headline of men do it more than women. [34:14] In my experience, it tends tends to be [34:16] the guy. [34:17] And you know, what is that that [34:19] information show me? [34:22] It shows me that [34:24] that sounds about right. [34:26] I do think from the people that follow [34:28] my content, listen to my content because [34:30] I stay very connected to my community of [34:34] so many women say, I feel like I'm in [34:36] this workplace and they are doubting my [34:37] competence. They're doubting my ability [34:39] to make decisions. I'm not being [34:42] believed. I'm putting I'm I'm being put [34:44] down. I'm whether it's not even their [34:46] experience, it's just because of their [34:49] gender. [34:50] And those are real those are real [34:52] questions. Does that mean that that's [34:54] gaslighting? Probably not all the time, [34:56] but [34:57] for me to say, that's that's a dumb [35:00] complaint. You know, that's just [35:01] complaining. [35:03] In many ways when you start denying that [35:04] reality, then you have the same problem. [35:06] Do you know what I am I've I've hired [35:08] thousands of people over the last decade [35:10] and I have to say [35:13] sometimes it's hard it's difficult to [35:15] understand the plight of someone else [35:16] when you haven't lived their experience [35:18] like you haven't been a woman or [35:19] whatever. So it's like it's like very [35:21] difficult. So you kind of just have to [35:22] take them for their word sometimes [35:23] because you've not lived it yourself. Or [35:25] you can look at data or whatever else. [35:27] And I do have to say that I have [35:29] experienced [35:30] male executives who were [35:35] extremely dismissive of their female [35:37] peers [35:38] in a way that was 100% [35:41] inconsistent as it relates to genders. [35:43] What I mean by that is I can think of [35:45] several male executives over the years [35:47] who I observed [35:50] dismissing or diminishing or not giving [35:52] the woman in the room the same credit [35:54] really for no other reason than she was [35:56] a woman. [35:57] And so it's a very real thing. And it's [35:58] not every man, I have to say this, but [36:00] there is a certain particular type of [36:02] person [36:03] who for some reason in my experience [36:06] would see a woman in the in the [36:08] workplace or in the high sort of upper [36:09] echelons of the professional um [36:11] environment as being less than them just [36:14] because of her gender. So when I hear, [36:16] you know, what you're saying about women [36:17] are predominantly you know, coming to [36:19] you talking about these issues of [36:20] gaslighting, it does kind of track with [36:22] what I've seen. [36:23] I'll tell you this, I've never had a man [36:26] come to me in all this time that I've [36:28] been from my book to my content this [36:30] number of years ever say I think I'm [36:32] being gaslit. It is it has always been [36:35] the woman. Never? Never. [36:38] What about the conversation around like [36:40] dealing with narcissists? Cuz this feels [36:41] like it's kind of one in the same. The [36:43] words are used in the same sort of [36:45] vernacular, but [36:46] >> Yeah. [36:47] Do you have men coming to you saying [36:48] that I think my partner's a narcissist? [36:49] >> Yes. [36:50] >> Yeah, that I do have. [36:52] Yeah, it's always it's always they're [36:54] married to one or just got out of a [36:56] relationship with one. But it's never [36:58] them. And what what do you say to [37:00] someone who is dealing with a narcissist [37:01] who is dealing with someone who [37:02] repeatedly gaslights them? Let's say [37:04] it's in the context of work. Yeah. What [37:06] are they meant to do? [37:07] Quit their job. [37:09] Well, that is an option. So let's not [37:11] rule that out. [37:11] >> Okay. Um if it's if it's worth it to [37:14] you. Cuz it's that's the question of [37:16] what's your what's your purpose here. [37:17] And this is where you're going to be [37:18] forever? [37:20] Then there's some things we need to put [37:21] in place. But what are you to do? You [37:23] are to limit [37:25] the interaction. Like limit the [37:26] exposure. Talk less. Neutral statements. [37:32] So if you can, many ways you can, [37:35] just limit the amount of physicality of [37:38] I don't have to see you. I don't have to [37:40] communicate with you. [37:41] I know you work [37:43] three doors down, but I don't have to be [37:45] your best friend and you certainly don't [37:46] have to be mine. Two is understanding [37:49] the game that you're in. [37:51] It's it's a game [37:53] for narcissists of praise or provoke. [37:55] Meaning if [37:56] I am not showering you with praise, then [38:00] the narcissist will turn to provoke in [38:02] order to create an argument for the same [38:05] effect. They they delight in frustration [38:07] just as may just as much as they delight [38:09] in your praise because they get the same [38:11] type of [38:12] control. [38:14] I've seen so many expert witnesses in my [38:17] field that are that I what I would term [38:20] are narcissists. They they they can [38:22] never possibly be wrong. They they don't [38:25] do empathy. [38:27] And again, this is me with the [38:29] understanding of, hey, we all have [38:31] narcissistic tendency. You know, we all [38:33] have narcissistic traits. And narcissism [38:35] is a diagnosable condition that you can [38:38] have. I think more people would qualify [38:40] more than they think. [38:42] But how do you handle it day-to-day? [38:44] Is know knowing what kind of game you're [38:46] in that's a game you're just not going [38:47] to play. I know I don't have to say [38:49] anything to that person. Two, I'm going [38:50] to limit my distance to them. And three, [38:54] I'm going to use neutral statements. I'm [38:56] going to use neutral statements like, [38:58] that's good to know. [38:59] Thanks for sharing. [39:01] Noted. Like things that they can't grab [39:04] onto and continue to have in a [39:05] conversation. [39:06] When you think of like the hallmarks of [39:08] of a really really [39:10] one of these types of people, what are [39:13] the way the characteristics that I could [39:15] should be looking out for if I'm dealing [39:17] with one such person who is is going to [39:19] try and manipulate me, is going to try [39:21] and gaslight me? [39:23] What what do they do? [39:25] They can never be happy for anybody but [39:27] themselves. [39:29] They can't be happy for you. They can't [39:30] be happy for other people. [39:32] These are the types that if you were to [39:34] say, "Hey, did you see that Steven just [39:36] got this award? Isn't that so great? [39:37] He's just nominated for whatever." And [39:38] they go, "I mean, that's I guess that's [39:40] fine. You know, I when I did this and [39:42] they start talking about them [39:44] selves. They can never be happy for [39:46] somebody else. They can't be happy for [39:48] you. It's [39:49] They have to find some way to turn the [39:51] conversation of [39:53] why the world is so hard and so pitiful [39:55] for them, that the world was against [39:56] them and they couldn't get it, but they [39:58] were just as deserving. [39:59] I mean, I guess that's fine. I mean, you [40:01] know, I do this, but nobody nobody [40:02] listens, nobody really cares. They find [40:04] that they have a very victim mentality. [40:07] So, two is a victim mentality. [40:08] Everything happens to them in some way. [40:11] And three, they can't feel for other [40:13] people. [40:14] They don't do [40:16] emotion. It's it's always about the [40:18] perception of [40:20] what others would think. They're very, [40:22] very [40:23] sensitive [40:25] to how others might portray them. So, [40:27] they're going to give you a different [40:28] view [40:29] than they give other people. [40:31] And so, the couple might be terrible. [40:35] But for a narcissist, they're going to [40:37] put on face that the relationship is [40:38] perfect to everybody else. And everybody [40:40] goes, [40:41] "You must be so blessed to be married to [40:42] that person." You're going, [40:44] "You kidding me?" [40:45] They're they're fooling everybody. And [40:47] it's a very helpless position. Have you [40:48] ever had a narcissist try and prey on [40:50] you? [40:51] Yeah. [40:52] Yeah. Yeah, I'm in the legal field, man. [40:55] Expert witnesses [40:57] have opinions [40:58] to them that are unquestionable. You [41:00] can't This is their opinion and nobody [41:02] else could ever argue with it. When I [41:04] have another expert who says just the [41:06] opposite. So, a lot of the times, they [41:08] are very condescending. [41:11] You know, that's fine. And they have [41:13] their opinion and this is all there is [41:15] and how dumb of you to ever question me. [41:18] And usually, what gives it away [41:21] is if I feel like this is somebody that, [41:23] okay, they're they can't be reasonable. [41:25] They're never going to give an inch on [41:27] what's reasonable. [41:29] I will ask this. I'll say, this is [41:31] typically in a deposition. I'll say, [41:32] "And you think the jury's going to like [41:34] that?" [41:35] And you Or you think other people are [41:36] going to agree with you? [41:38] And all of a sudden, they kind of change [41:41] in an instant to be able to match [41:43] what the jury is going to think. So, if [41:45] I were to say, "And you think And you [41:46] think that's okay? And you think others [41:48] are going to find that okay? And you [41:49] think that the jury, when they hear [41:51] this, they're they're all going to [41:53] agree with this very hard-line opinion." [41:57] I've seen it every time where they [41:58] That's It's only when I reference other [42:00] people. [42:02] The presentation of themselves to other [42:03] people that they kind of put on a a [42:06] show. Why? [42:08] Because they know that [42:11] the [42:12] perception of the crowd is everything. [42:16] They need everybody to like them, to [42:18] fawn over them. They they want their [42:20] idea to to be the best. And so, they [42:23] will manipulate the situation to be the [42:25] chameleon, to to make sure that [42:27] everybody [42:28] loves them, at least in in their mind. [42:31] It's not a It's not a reasonable [42:33] thought. And so, they will typically [42:35] change their opinion to sound more [42:36] palatable, [42:38] even though they could have admitted to [42:39] that [42:40] you know, 2 hours into the deposition. [42:42] Do they tend to talk more or less than [42:44] the average person in the room? Much [42:45] more. [42:47] Hm. [42:48] Is there a thin line between just being [42:49] insecure and being a narcissist? [42:51] Because I you know, one of the things I [42:53] was thinking about is you said earlier [42:54] that they tend to bring everything back [42:55] to themselves. I was thinking about all [42:57] the people that I know that if we were [42:58] having a conversation about your book [43:00] doing really, really well, [43:02] the first response to that would be [43:04] their mention of their own book. Like [43:06] they would immediately bring it straight [43:07] back to something about them. And I was [43:08] wondering, some of those people I just [43:09] have in the category of just being a [43:10] little bit insecure. [43:12] And that they just, you know, they're in [43:13] a search for validation. So, I'm [43:15] wondering where where you think the line [43:17] might be between sort of narcissistic [43:18] behavior and just like extremely [43:20] insecure. Maybe there's not a line. [43:22] Maybe extreme insecurity is narcissism. [43:24] Both can be true. You know, I'd I'd say [43:26] that [43:28] not all insecure people are narcissists, [43:30] but all narcissists are insecure. Hm. [43:32] >> [clears throat] [43:33] >> Um I would I would say that if I had to [43:36] give some kind of [43:38] line, it would be the interest for [43:40] growth. [43:43] Insecure people are looking for ways to [43:44] grow [43:46] and to secure and attach. [43:48] Narcissists, they're not looking for [43:50] anybody [43:51] to attach on to. They're looking for [43:54] people to [43:55] support them, you know, to please them. [43:58] And so, it they have no interest in [44:01] growth. [44:02] They To them, they've learned all they [44:03] have have to learn. I am the best. I [44:05] cannot improve anymore. That to me would [44:08] be the difference. When you dealt with [44:10] narcissists in your own life and in the [44:11] courtroom, [44:13] what is the reason why they couldn't [44:15] prey on you? What did you do as defense [44:18] to stop their games, their typical games [44:20] working on you? [44:21] I don't chase their words. [44:25] Often, one of the biggest things I see [44:27] wrong [44:29] in conversation [44:31] is a narcissist will Same for a [44:32] gaslighter. They'll dig a hole. [44:35] All right? And then [44:37] they expect you to fill it. [44:39] Meaning, they're going to say something [44:40] to frustrate you. And you go, "No, no, [44:42] that's not what happened. Don't you [44:43] remember?" And And you just start [44:44] chasing it. And then they just dig [44:47] another hole. And then you keep going [44:49] and you keep going and you're exhausted [44:50] cuz all you've been doing is trying to [44:52] plug holes. You're not having a real [44:54] conversation. [44:55] And when I can [44:57] give it a very clear definition of the a [44:59] very clear signal of [45:02] noted. [45:03] You know, I'm just going to stay right [45:05] there. I'm going to see I'm going to put [45:07] down the shovel [45:08] and stay right there with them. [45:10] And maybe I'll say something as neutral [45:12] as got it. [45:15] I don't have to chase it. I don't have [45:16] to say anything. And And to me, the the [45:20] people that have those narcissistic [45:21] traits, once they realize that they can [45:23] have no game with you, that you're not [45:25] going to play, [45:26] they find somebody else. [45:29] They find somebody else. If you've ever [45:30] had somebody [45:31] come to you and they're the more [45:33] emotionally toxic type of person, they [45:36] always have some kind of problem. They [45:37] come with you and they have this [45:38] problem. You go, "I I just I can't." All [45:39] right, this moment I will. [45:41] And 10 minutes later, what's happened? [45:43] They don't have that issue. They've [45:43] already gone to talk to somebody else. [45:46] I was watching a [45:48] Dame Dash on The Breakfast Club. I don't [45:49] know if you've seen it. [laughter] [45:51] But it's really good. [45:51] >> Another Breakfast Club. But it's it's [45:53] Dame Dash is on there cuz he he was he [45:56] filed for bankruptcy and Charlamagne is [45:57] sat there. [45:58] And Charlamagne [clears throat] is I've [45:59] actually interviewed both of them both [46:01] Dame and Charlamagne. And Charlamagne is [46:04] very relaxed and every once in a while [46:07] just tells Dame Dash that he thinks he's [46:09] broke. [46:10] And then Dame Dash is like very like [46:13] hot-headed and like trying to prove [46:15] prove all the reasons why he's not [46:16] broken and like really like, you know, [46:17] gassing himself. And I it was it was an [46:20] interesting It's an interesting video to [46:21] watch, I think. It's the more recent one [46:23] that came out within the last year [46:25] because it does show, in my view, how to [46:27] deal with someone who [46:30] has a very has a significant ego. Yeah. [46:33] Which is [46:34] Charlamagne just never changes state. [46:37] Like no matter what the volume is, no [46:39] matter how much emotion, no matter when [46:41] he starts [46:42] calling him some quite personal insults, [46:44] Charlamagne's demeanor, his tone, his [46:48] posture Yeah. doesn't change. [46:50] >> Unbothered. Unbothered. And you can see [46:52] it's super triggering that you just [46:54] can't get to this guy. Like it looks [46:56] like Dame is like really annoyed that he [46:57] and he tries to say more offensive [46:58] things. He calls you a you're a this, [47:00] you're a that, the other. [47:01] And it's funny cuz I was watching it [47:02] this morning. [47:03] And it for me it kind of tracks with a [47:05] lot of the stuff you're saying about [47:06] like just not going with them. Yeah. [47:08] Just not following them works cuz that [47:10] they want you to go somewhere. And that [47:12] there's a certain conflict they want to [47:13] get in with you. And if you just kind of [47:15] refuse and just stay anchored to [47:16] whatever you were your point of view is, [47:18] it's it's funny to watch. They want to [47:20] push you. [47:21] Yeah. Yeah, my my dad, I can remember [47:23] growing up, [47:25] I'd be in the passenger seat, he's [47:26] driving. [47:27] And you ever had it where somebody [47:30] you're in the passenger seat and [47:31] somebody's just rearing the the bumper [47:33] right on them. Mhm. And And I And I'd be [47:35] looking in the side mirror and I'm like, [47:37] I kind of start stressing out for him. [47:39] You know, I don't know if that [47:40] somebody's really riding the bumper, you [47:42] know, right behind him. [47:43] And I mean, just like clockwork, what he [47:45] would do, we have shoulders on our in on [47:48] the roads there in Texas. [47:50] And rather than trying to speed up or [47:52] get mad, he would just kind of pull over [47:54] to the shoulder. And he would say this [47:55] every time. He'd say, "Go on with your [47:56] bad self." [47:57] Every time he'd go, "Go on with your bad [47:59] self." in the rearview mirror. Like, [48:01] that's how unbothered he was by that. Of [48:04] I feel like so many people get road [48:06] rage. And so many people talk out loud [48:08] to the cars while they're while they're [48:10] driving. [48:12] And he it just never got him worked up. [48:14] And realizing [48:16] my value and my worth and knowing who I [48:20] am is not at all determined [48:23] by [48:25] where you feel I should go. [48:27] It goes back to that idea of If you want [48:28] to tell me the sky is purple, knock [48:30] yourself out. [48:31] Now, I I don't have to be right and you [48:35] don't have the ability to to push me. I [48:38] can move and you have your own [48:40] I I know my lane. I know my speed. I [48:43] don't have to match anybody else's. So, [48:45] when there's somebody is unbothered, [48:47] it's not because they don't care. [48:49] It's not for lack of care. [48:52] It's an understanding. It's discernment [48:55] of knowing [48:57] I know who I am in this moment and why [48:59] in the world would I try to be anybody [49:01] else? [49:02] Wouldn't life be amazing if we could all [49:03] be untriggerable? [49:06] It'd be more peaceful, that's for sure. [49:08] It's interesting because again, just [49:10] reflecting on that interview I watched [49:11] this morning, when Dame Dash calls [49:13] Charlamagne something really, really [49:14] offensive, I noticed that as a viewer, I [49:17] immediately look at Charlamagne [49:19] to see his reaction to figure out if [49:22] what Dame Dash just said was true. [49:25] And you see what I'm saying? So, he he [49:26] turned him and said, "You're a X." [49:28] >> Right. [49:29] And then Charlamagne just kind of [49:31] laughed and like it just it was like [49:33] water off a duck's back. So, immediately [49:34] as the viewer I go, "Well, that can't be [49:36] true then, cuz Charlemagne doesn't seem [49:37] to care. Exactly. Well, it's it's not [49:40] the lack of [49:41] a care. It's [49:44] it's just the opposite. It's all the [49:46] more care of knowing who he is. [49:50] So, if [49:52] I were to tell you [49:54] right now [49:55] I hate your purple shirt. It's the most [49:57] ugliest purple shirt I've ever seen, [49:59] Stephen. Like your shirt is so ugly in [50:02] that purple. [50:04] Does it affect you whatsoever? [50:06] No, cuz I'm not wearing a purple shirt. [50:07] For anyone listening when I was wearing [50:08] a purple That's right. [50:09] >> [laughter] [50:10] >> That's a good point. Right, but you see [50:12] how you you already know [50:14] the characteristics of of you. You [50:16] already know what you're wearing. [50:18] And it's not just your clothes. [50:19] I'm I'm wearing my confidence. I'm [50:22] wearing everything that [50:24] your parents, your your loved ones have [50:26] instilled and put on you. I'm I'm [50:28] wearing the armor of my faith. I I am I [50:31] have all these other things that I'm [50:32] wearing. [50:34] And [50:35] if you want to say my shirt's purple, [50:37] that [50:38] that doesn't affect me at all, cuz [50:39] that's that's not who I am. And so so [50:42] often people get mixed up of arguing [50:44] about no, I don't have a purple shirt [50:46] on. [50:47] Mhm. When why would you ever argue with [50:51] that? They they [50:52] it's that quote by Abraham Lincoln that [50:55] I love. [50:57] If never argue with a fool, because an [50:59] onlooker [51:01] can never know the difference. [51:03] Right? And so it's it's knowing No, I I [51:06] know exactly who I am and what I'm [51:08] wearing. [51:09] And this sort of speaks to the fact that [51:10] your reaction determines how onlookers [51:13] will interpret everything that's [51:15] happening. [51:16] Like you know Oh, the worst thing you [51:19] could do to somebody who insults you is [51:20] laugh. I mean, what does it do? It I [51:23] mean, it it infuriates them, right? But [51:25] when the same thing with a bully. A [51:27] bully says something to you that they [51:30] know is meant to hurt you. [51:33] And if I were to turn around and say, [51:35] "Did you say that to to embarrass me?" [51:38] I mean, what are they going to do? They [51:39] they could say yes, they could say no. [51:41] Either way, you're realizing I'm not [51:43] getting get any reaction. What you're [51:45] showing them is [51:46] for you to do this, it's just not going [51:47] to be fun for you. [51:48] It's going to be zero fun whatsoever for [51:51] you. And so they'll find that with [51:52] somebody somebody else. It's it's always [51:54] your reaction [51:56] that's going to [51:58] determine how the conversation goes [52:00] forward. There's a lot of people [52:01] listening right now that are a long way [52:03] away from that. Very easily triggered. [52:05] Yeah. Seeking justice, you know, [52:08] whatever it might be. [52:10] For those people, is it like a muscle [52:11] they have to build or is there What is [52:13] the journey to getting to this level of [52:15] sort of mastery? It's a discipline. [52:18] It is in the same way that people [52:21] invest in so many other things in our [52:23] life. We invest in our health, we invest [52:25] in self-help books, we invest in the [52:27] podcasts that we listen to. It is the [52:30] same. You have to invest in your [52:31] communication. [52:33] We don't get taught in school. [52:35] We don't, you know, I I went to law [52:37] school. People think I learned this in [52:38] law school. No. [52:40] Law school teaches you how to read the [52:41] law. It doesn't teach you how to read [52:42] people. [52:43] You had a [52:45] To me, if you are somebody that is in a [52:47] position of expertise and to share [52:49] something [52:50] it either came at great personal cost or [52:52] you're making it up. [52:54] Like it it it is something that you have [52:56] learned. Right? [52:58] >> [laughter] [52:58] >> It's true. And so, I mean, whether it's [53:00] through skill, knowledge, training, it's [53:04] I have You want to know how that I know [53:06] these things? Cuz I've lived it. [53:07] You know, I I have been on the bad side, [53:09] I've been on the good side, and [53:12] it's [53:13] it is not it's never something that's [53:15] just going to come to you. [53:17] We are emotional creatures and we're [53:19] hormonal creatures. Mhm. So, how do how [53:21] do you think about our emotions, our [53:23] hormones, our health, our physical, [53:25] cognitive state as it relates to like [53:27] walking into the courtroom and being [53:29] ready? Like how much of the you know, [53:30] cuz if I've had zero hours sleep and I'm [53:33] I don't know hungry and whatever else [53:35] and I'm I had an argument and I'm [53:36] stressed about something. It's going to [53:38] be significantly harder to show up and [53:39] be a great communicator and win the [53:40] argument against somebody. [53:42] >> Right. Do you think about these things? [53:45] All the time. I mean, the emotions are [53:47] are right there connected to the words. [53:49] And what do you what how do you prepare [53:51] to be ready [53:52] for battle? [53:54] It's an emotional awareness of how I'm [53:57] feeling [53:59] and also how the other person is. [54:01] Because if I just respond [54:03] I mean, yeah, if I respond to their [54:04] emotional reaction, I'll miss it every [54:06] time. Same thing in relationships. If I [54:09] respond to the reaction [54:12] I'll lose that moment to actually speak [54:13] to the need. So, even in the courtroom [54:16] for me [54:18] if [54:19] I know that I'm a little sleepy. [54:21] I know I'm a little hungry. I'm a little [54:23] grumpy. [54:24] You know what? I can either try and [54:26] pretend that I'm not [54:27] or I might get up from the jury [54:30] and say, "Good morning, everybody. I [54:31] have to admit to you, I'm a little [54:32] grumpy. I didn't eat all that much this [54:33] morning. Anybody else grumpy?" And then [54:35] everybody starts to kind of nod. And [54:36] now, hey, we all kind of relate. Not to [54:39] my words, but now to the feeling. [54:41] And now you trust me more, I trust you [54:44] more. [54:45] Because I'm being more authentic. [54:47] And do you think people should do that [54:49] in their own interpersonal [54:50] relationships, which is just called out [54:52] there states? Absolutely. Because the [54:54] perfection is not relatable. Struggle [54:56] is. Emotions are. [54:58] If I were to come to you [55:00] and say [55:02] and you say, "How are you?" And I go, [55:03] "Good. Everything's good." when it is [55:04] not. [55:05] Am I being authentic or am I being fake? [55:08] But if I were to say, "Let me tell you [55:10] I've had a morning and it's testing me [55:13] in a way I was not expecting. [55:15] And my mind is just not here." [55:18] Does that make you trust me more or [55:19] trust me less? Trust you more. Every [55:20] time. [55:21] Mhm. So, when you can share your [55:23] struggles with people. I'm not talking [55:24] about your deepest inner desire [55:26] struggles. [55:27] I'm saying [55:29] let me put it this way. [55:30] Sarah and I check in with each other [55:32] every morning. She's my wife. [55:34] And [55:36] it's only about 10 minutes after she [55:38] drops the kid off uh kids off. [55:40] And [55:42] we kind of run through how we're doing. [55:44] And the number one thing she asked me or [55:46] tells me goes, "You told me a lot about [55:48] what you're doing. [55:50] You haven't told me about how you're [55:50] feeling." [55:52] And that's [55:52] that's the truth of the default, I [55:55] think, of a lot of men and a lot of [55:56] people. I'm going to tell you what's [55:57] going on, what's on my agenda. [55:59] What I'm doing. [56:01] I haven't told you a lot about how I'm [56:01] feeling. [56:03] And we store all that stuff up, cuz it's [56:04] still there. [56:05] But if I can share with you [56:09] what is my struggle [56:11] what's happening, not just the good, but [56:13] more importantly the the bad [56:16] I mean, that [56:17] it's always going to bring that [56:18] authenticity into the play. [56:20] Women and men are very different in many [56:21] ways. [56:22] And [56:23] >> [laughter] [56:24] >> Yeah. We're very different in many ways. [56:25] Men are I I don't know. It feels like [56:28] men just, you know, again, I'm I'm [56:30] stereotyping here. So, it's not all men [56:32] and of course people are different. But [56:34] just speaking generally, the stereotype [56:36] is that men are typically a bit more [56:39] emotionally composed or should I say [56:42] flat. [56:43] And women have uh more emotional [56:45] fluctuations. One could look at hormone [56:47] changes throughout the month and talk [56:48] about why that might be, etc. etc. I've [56:50] had many scientists here talk to me [56:52] about hormone fluctuations and how that [56:53] impacts how someone feels. [56:56] But what this means in our romantic [56:57] relationships is sometimes [57:01] we meet each other on very different [57:02] wavelengths. Yeah. So, my relationship [57:05] my partner's probably seen me cry [57:07] once Right. in 7 years. [57:11] Maybe twice, but probably once. [57:13] I've probably seen her cry [57:16] 500 times, [57:18] >> [laughter] [57:18] >> maybe more. Yeah. So, it feels it almost [57:20] feels like I'm just going to be [57:22] completely honest, cuz I just think it's [57:23] helpful, so you can [ __ ] me up online if [57:24] you want, but [57:25] I sometimes feels like [57:29] we're different species. Mhm. Like the [57:32] way that I interact with my guy friends [57:34] and the way that the sort of wavelength [57:36] that my romantic partner my my my [57:39] girlfriend operates on [57:40] are very very different. So, it's very [57:42] easy to like misunderstand. And we spend [57:44] a lot of time talking about how men need [57:45] to be [57:46] more emotional and more I don't know. [57:49] Men need to change how how they are, [57:51] because it's the problem. [57:53] But [57:54] what about the like what about the other [57:56] side of that? Which is [57:59] >> [laughter] [58:01] >> do [58:03] do women also need to think about [58:06] do we need to meet in the middle? [58:07] >> [laughter] [58:08] >> Is what I'm saying. [58:10] There certainly is space to meet in the [58:12] middle. Like who's right in that I don't [58:14] know. Is is there a person that's right [58:16] in this configuration? Am I meant to be [58:17] way more emotional [58:19] and be [58:20] or or is she meant to be way more [58:21] composed? Cuz I I think that's often how [58:23] both sides feel. [58:24] They feel like, "Why aren't you coming [58:25] to my wavelength on this issue?" But I [58:28] think here's what you're missing. She [58:29] would be much more composed if you would [58:30] be more emotional. [58:33] Mhm. [58:35] And so, a lot of times what I find in my [58:37] own marriage [58:39] is [58:40] when I show emotion, the more composed [58:42] she is. [58:43] I mean, if I start screaming and crying, [58:45] I I think my girlfriend's going to I'm [58:46] not saying screaming. I'm I'm saying [58:47] show emotion. What kind of emotion? [58:51] Of being in it with her. [58:52] And what does that look like? [58:54] That means you're going to say things [58:56] that [58:57] make her feel it. [58:59] There's a difference if I just go [59:00] static. This what happens to me Yeah. uh [59:04] truthfully is [59:05] let's say we're in an argument about [59:06] something or something came up. [59:08] And so, she is emotional about it. If I [59:12] dismiss it [59:13] Okay, this is so dumb. Really? Right [59:15] now? This is cuz arguments never come at [59:17] the most opportune time. They come at [59:19] the worst possible time. Yeah, that's [59:21] hello. That's all relationships. If I [59:23] dismiss it [59:24] right? Does that make her come closer to [59:26] me or further away from me? [59:28] And if I'm pushing her further away from [59:29] me, why would she not be more emotional? [59:32] Why why would she Why would she not be [59:34] further away from me if I dismiss that? [59:38] For every woman [59:40] to be more emotional as a man, tears are [59:42] not necessary. [59:44] Connection is being in it is saying [59:46] things that make her feel that you're [59:49] you're genuinely feeling it. The [59:51] difference I find with men and what I [59:52] struggle with is [59:55] I can say that I'm sad. I have a hard [59:57] time expressing sad. [59:59] I can say that I'm really regretful. I [60:01] have a hard time [60:03] expressing that. [60:05] I think that is something that happens a [60:07] lot with most relationships and I think [60:10] that happens a lot with men of [60:12] we were emotional [60:14] and we got taught early that [60:16] you [60:17] you are not to cry. We I couldn't even [60:19] tell you how many times I ever saw my [60:20] dad cry. I think this is it. The [60:23] modeling we had as well is [60:25] my dad was either angry or completely [60:28] static. And when I say angry, he was [60:29] very very rarely angry. Right. [60:31] >> But but when I saw him engage with my [60:33] mom on an emotional level, it would be [60:36] him yelling back. Right. [60:39] If he wasn't yelling back, he was [60:40] completely just like [60:42] he was just very calm, static, [60:44] unemotional. There was no in between. [60:46] Yeah. It It all comes down to [60:49] repair. [60:50] How quickly you get to repair. That [60:54] means can I validate the feeling that [60:57] she has? [60:59] Validation [61:00] is It's not weakness, it's repair. In my [61:04] world [61:06] relationships don't fall apart because [61:08] of one big failure. [61:09] They fall apart because of a hundred [61:12] moments [61:14] where repair could have happened [61:16] and it didn't. [61:17] We just chose not to. Or you could have [61:19] said I'm sorry, but you withheld it. I [61:21] could have chose to validate how you're [61:22] feeling, but I said that's stupid. [61:25] And it's it's those, the hundreds of [61:27] those little bitty moments where all of [61:29] a sudden no wonder you're your world's [61:31] apart. Because you chose in those little [61:33] bitty moments not to do repair because [61:35] you said, "Ah, this is so stupid. This [61:37] is so small." Yeah, it is small. All the [61:39] more reason why you should repair pretty [61:41] quickly. [61:42] And so when you can validate those [61:44] concerns [61:46] even when you say she's being emotional [61:47] you're not [61:50] when you go into that static mode, when [61:51] I go into that static mode, it's a [61:53] choice by me to do something different. [61:57] Not say the thing I always say. Not be [61:58] dismissive. Not find ways to try and [62:02] convince her that she shouldn't feel [62:04] this way. [62:05] But if I validate, if I say things like [62:09] I can see how you feel that way. [62:11] If that's how you interpreted it [62:14] you know what? I don't blame you for [62:14] feeling that way. I can see that. That [62:17] sounds scary. That sounds frustrating. [62:19] If I can [62:21] choose that [62:23] It's it's this like this isn't the key [62:24] for me. And trust me, I'm talking to [62:27] myself here. Yeah. All right? Cuz every [62:29] Every guy I feel like can be like, [62:31] "Okay, this is right." If I can [62:34] make the hard choice in that moment to [62:36] put aside my frustration, just for a [62:38] moment [62:39] put aside my personal frustration [62:42] and validate the feeling [62:44] and say [62:46] words that speak to her need, the need [62:49] to feel heard, the need to feel safe, [62:51] the need to feel like she's not being [62:53] too much [62:55] then all of a sudden it all shrinks. And [62:58] you know what? My frustration [63:00] kind of goes away. [63:01] Why? Because everything's better now. [63:02] We've We've had moments of repair. [63:05] And then if I still am really frustrated [63:07] then I can bring it up. Hey, can I Can I [63:09] bring up something that you said that's [63:11] really bothering me? [63:13] And then you do. How as a man do you [63:17] know that you're not setting a bad [63:18] precedence for the future? [63:21] And what I mean here is Yeah. if I [63:23] constantly, you know, justify how she's [63:25] feeling and I and I seek repair and then [63:27] when she's happy, I just let it go [63:30] there's [63:31] I think sometimes there's a worry [63:33] as a man that [63:35] if you just lay down and take [63:36] everything, then you're just going to [63:38] get more stuff in the future. Like [63:39] you're setting a bad precedence for the [63:40] future of this relationship where [63:42] there's sometimes actually no, I wasn't [63:43] in the wrong or I know I did I did I do [63:45] disagree with this. [63:46] >> Right. [63:47] And I think I've observed a lot of [63:49] relationships, especially with some of [63:50] my guy friends where because they like [63:52] never stood up for themselves Yeah. [63:54] >> then they're like living in a prison. [63:56] Right. [63:56] >> They like never [63:58] stood up for themselves. Yes. And so [64:00] they're they've kind of lost all of [64:01] their autonomy and agency and control [64:03] and they [64:04] you know, even when you're listening to [64:05] this, there's probably people you can [64:06] think of in your life where the guy has [64:08] always opted for an easy life in the [64:10] short term and now over the long term he [64:12] has a really hard one. Yes. And again, [64:14] men and women. Of course. So this is the [64:17] balance I'm trying to understand in your [64:18] view is [64:20] you know, when do you pick the fight and [64:21] when do you say, "No, that's not." [64:23] versus just laying down and taking it. [64:26] This is quite [64:27] >> [laughter] [64:27] >> This is quite personal to me as well [64:28] because I think my dad did that a bit [64:30] too much. I think my dad he never he [64:32] never chose the fight. And then I look I [64:34] look at how that played out over 20 [64:36] years and I'm like, "Damn." [64:38] It's completely changed me cuz it means [64:40] that I will now go through the conflict [64:44] Mhm. [64:45] and stand up for myself when I hit a [64:47] place where I'm like, [64:48] "That [64:49] I'm not going to be able to honor that [64:50] for you for the next 30 years. I will [64:52] stand my ground." [64:54] Do you know if there's like an area [64:55] where um we might might might say my [64:57] girlfriend's unhappy about a certain [64:58] thing I do. Yeah. If I don't think that [65:00] I'm I'm going to be able to promise to [65:02] not do that for the next like 10, 20, 30 [65:04] years if I if I'm unwilling to change [65:06] Yeah. I have to stand my ground. Because [65:08] if I concede today, it's hell tomorrow. [65:11] Yeah, what what I'm hearing [65:14] what I'm hearing is fear of autonomy. [65:18] Fear of my rights. Yeah. Fear of my [65:23] dominance. Yeah, like my freedom being [65:25] Yeah. [65:26] >> Well, it's it's You want to hear the [65:27] probably the number one word you'll [65:30] hear [65:31] with relationships that are on the [65:33] brink, it's caged. [65:34] Men feels caged. [65:36] You know, the man feels caged. And [65:38] really all that is, it's a lack of [65:40] confidence [65:42] of knowing [65:45] if I am willing to do something [65:49] different [65:51] then I can't have anything else. So it's [65:54] it's It's thinking in terms of [65:59] zero sum. [66:01] See, both can be true. [66:03] I can You can still validate how she's [66:05] feeling [66:07] and not at all touch what you still know [66:09] to be true. So you can still disagree [66:11] with her. [66:12] But every time we go into a [66:14] conversation, we walk in with a need. [66:17] A need to feel loved, understood. It is [66:19] always depths. Like you think of um [66:23] like a kid. Right? My son, my daughter. [66:26] If when she was small and she screamed [66:31] or she cried or told me no still tells [66:33] me no. You know, of all these things and [66:35] I just said, "No, are you kidding me? [66:36] You're going to tell me and I You're [66:38] crying right now? Really?" And I get all [66:40] upset when she screams. [66:42] But with kids we don't do that. We go, [66:44] "She's hungry. [66:45] She's tired. [66:47] She's scared." Mhm. And we just forget [66:49] that we're all just big kids. [66:51] And we all have those like hidden needs [66:53] underneath us. And so you still can [66:57] stand your ground and say [67:00] So let's run it. So let's say for [67:02] example [67:03] >> A specific example. From my [67:04] ex-girlfriend, I was on my phone in bed [67:06] and I was sending a message cuz there's [67:07] something going on with my in my [67:08] business back in the UK and I was in I [67:10] was in Asia at the time. [67:11] >> Yeah. And she said to me that she wanted [67:14] to make a rule where there was never any [67:16] phones in bed, ever. I could never touch [67:19] my phone in the bedroom. Right? And as I [67:20] thought this through, I thought, "God." [67:22] I thought about all the scenarios where [67:24] I might need to touch my phone in the [67:25] bedroom. [67:26] And what would I I realized that what [67:28] would end up happening is I just [67:29] wouldn't come into the bedroom. I'd like [67:31] go and do it in the in the [67:32] >> [clears throat] [67:32] >> toilet or the shower or I just like I [67:34] wouldn't come to bed if I needed to do [67:35] something on my phone. Right. And so the [67:38] conversation went where I was like, I I [67:40] realized in this moment that I had to [67:41] kind of like [67:43] not lay down on this issue because I [67:45] would disappoint her in the future. Mhm. [67:47] I was setting myself up to fail in the [67:48] future. If I if I accepted this and made [67:51] her some kind of promise though you [67:52] know, agreed that we I wasn't going to [67:54] touch my phone ever again in the [67:55] bedroom. [67:57] And so that was one such example where [67:58] I'm like, I think [clears throat] I [67:59] actually need to stand my ground a bit [68:01] here or I'm setting myself up for a [68:02] future expectation I can't meet. [68:05] So in that moment, what did you think [68:07] her need was? Her need was connection [68:10] and she was interpreting me being on the [68:11] phone in that space as a disconnection [68:14] in some way. And [68:16] could it possibly be perceived as that? [68:18] 100%. [68:19] Okay. [68:19] >> But it wasn't the phone. It was the It [68:21] was the [68:22] It was me not It was her not feeling [68:25] connected. In my view, it at that moment [68:28] in time, in that particular week [68:30] because I was so busy in that particular [68:31] week that I think she was trying to find [68:35] a a symptom or a tool or a guarantee or [68:38] a promise to express [68:39] the feeling of disconnection. So that's [68:41] why I look back on it and go, "It was [68:42] actually something else. That was just a [68:43] symptom of a feeling she had at that [68:44] moment in time probably." Right. But [68:46] that was an example where I like I if [68:48] I'd conceded, it would have it would not [68:51] have been sustainable. There would have [68:52] been more arguments in the future. I'm [68:53] not saying you concede. [68:55] I'm saying there are times that if you [68:57] want the key to the relationship it is [69:01] putting her comfort over your [69:03] inconvenience. So what should I have [69:05] done in that situation? Give me some [69:06] advice. [69:07] Do you think? [69:09] Well, you've already kind of named it. [69:10] One, she's it's not you saying [69:14] The wrong thing to say is, "Well, you [69:16] were just on your phone. I mean, you [69:17] just I mean, you're on your phone all [69:18] the time. You're on the phone all the [69:20] time. What are you talking about?" And [69:21] you start arguing cuz now you're [69:24] you're responding to the reaction. [69:25] You're not addressing the need. If you [69:27] were to slow down [69:29] and say, [69:31] "Look, I I still want to be connected [69:33] with you. Is there a [69:35] any kind of place where I can still take [69:38] care of what I need to take care of and [69:39] also [69:40] be connected to you?" Or if there's a [69:43] situation where you say, "Well, what [69:44] about this?" [69:47] Before I just get my phone and grab it, [69:49] I'm going to tell you what I'm doing [69:50] ahead of time. [69:51] Or I'm going to ask. [69:54] Maybe that's where it is. You don't want [69:55] to ask. Hey, I [69:58] Greg is supposed to email me some [70:01] slides or a deck or whatever. Can I [70:04] check that out real quick? You hear how [70:05] she's probably going to say yes. But the [70:07] fact that you are saying, "Hey, I'm [70:09] acknowledging our connection right now." [70:12] And see, it might make you [70:13] uncomfortable. Saying, "I don't I don't [70:14] like anybody telling me what to do. I [70:15] don't have to I don't want to report to [70:17] anybody." Okay, that's that's fine. [70:19] Well, then you just know that connection [70:22] is always going to be weak. And so you [70:23] you're signing your name to that. [70:26] I don't think I mean there's I have lots [70:28] of thoughts on phones in houses [70:31] uh and where they should go. But [70:33] if you were to have [70:35] instead of arguing the [70:37] "What are you talking about? You're on [70:38] your phone all all the time." [70:39] And instead [70:41] said, [70:42] "I can see how [70:44] that would make you feel like I'm not [70:45] paying attention to you." And letting [70:47] her respond to that. And you saying, [70:49] "Look, I don't want to Me being on this [70:51] this is not at all me trying to signal [70:53] that [70:54] I'm not trying to be here with you. I'm [70:57] trying to escape on you." And have that [70:59] conversation. [71:00] And that's where you can just say, "It [71:01] is important to me that I have these [71:03] things. And for me to be able to connect [71:05] with you and kind of rest my brain, I [71:07] need to take care of these things. [71:08] What's the best way that I can do that?" [71:11] I think then that's when you actually [71:12] are able to have a conversation of like [71:14] let's make a game game plan that makes [71:16] sense because [71:17] if you you put your inconvenience over [71:21] her comfort, [71:22] she will always [71:24] discredit that to you. Your bank account [71:26] will always continue to to go low. [71:30] And if but if you say, "Look, I I'm [71:32] willing to do a little bit of [71:33] inconvenient things to make you feel [71:35] better, [71:36] make you more comfortable." [71:38] I mean that that only grows your [71:39] account. I mean that that when when you [71:42] have a relationship that can [71:45] last a whole lot longer. I think I'm [71:47] slightly traumatized because um [71:49] >> [laughter] [71:50] >> I I think the model that I had of [71:53] relationships meant that someone can [71:55] increasingly sort of encroach on your [71:57] freedom Yes. until you are virtually [72:00] powerless. I think that's a lot of guys. [72:03] I've felt that. I've certainly felt [72:04] that. Yeah, so I I try and fight back. [72:07] And sometimes I think I overdo it. And [72:09] this is what this is one such example [72:11] where actually objectively when I hear [72:12] myself say, "She asked me not to [72:15] like be on on my phone in bed." I'm [72:16] like, "Well, that's kind of a reasonable [72:18] request to be honest. Like the bedroom [72:19] can be a place where we just like go on [72:21] the phones. I could just do it in my [72:21] office and then come to bed when I'm [72:22] ready." [72:23] >> Right. But I think my I get my back up [72:26] because I've just got so many examples [72:27] of men who like didn't stand up for [72:29] themselves. Yes. And then were rendered [72:31] powerless down the line. So it's like if [72:32] I give you this, then tomorrow you're [72:34] going to say, "Maybe you can't be on my [72:35] phone in the kitchen." And then maybe I [72:37] can't be on my phone in the bathroom. [72:38] And then So I just thought well, if I [72:39] just stand up for myself here, then I [72:41] just hold hold off the What I'm not all [72:43] saying is that the guy go, "Yeah, sure. [72:46] That's fine." And then she asks for [72:47] something and you go, "Yeah, sure. [72:48] That's fine." And you just you're super [72:50] passive with everything. That's where I [72:52] think you do feel like you're just you [72:53] look around and you you've given up [72:55] everything to where you don't feel like [72:56] I I have anything to to grab onto. I [72:59] want to throw in another example that a [73:00] lot of people relate to. A lot of men [73:01] have like a hobby with that with their [73:03] guy friends. Right? Like watching the [73:05] football, talking [ __ ] in the group [73:07] chat. [73:08] I think it's so important to defend [73:09] those things. Absolutely. Even for her [73:11] attraction to you. [73:13] Like I think I I have no evidence to say [73:15] that this is true. It's just a feeling. [73:17] I think to some degree that my partner [73:18] likes the fact that I'll stand up for [73:19] myself in certain in certain areas. And [73:22] I'll say, "No, no, no, no. This is me [73:23] time. This is for me." I agree. And I [73:25] can imagine the opposite, the passivity [73:27] or kind of rolling over [73:29] as being a really like unattractive [73:30] thing. Absolutely. I I think where you [73:33] are laying yourself down or just rolling [73:36] over, that is that can be very [73:38] unattractive. That it's you need to have [73:40] a backbone. At the same time you can't [73:41] be so extreme that your way is the only [73:44] way. But when you choose to say, "No, [73:45] no. This is [73:46] I'm going to willing to take a stand [73:47] here." Then that's [73:49] I think to me it sends a signal of [73:51] strength. Right? Strength of mind, [73:52] strength of will. [73:54] But for me, when you have those things [73:56] that are your hobbies, uh the things [73:58] that you really like, [73:59] a sign of a good relationship is that [74:01] she's going to be happy you get to do [74:03] those cuz they make you happy. Even [74:05] though she might hate it and think it's [74:07] annoying and it's weird and you know, [74:09] you're taking up that space in the [74:10] garage and whatever. [74:12] But if it makes you happy and they know [74:15] that this is your space and this is your [74:17] time because [74:19] I I you have to have those things that [74:20] fill you up. [74:22] Right? And [74:24] the truth is [74:25] the marriage isn't enough, the kids [74:26] aren't enough, your jobs aren't enough. [74:27] You have to have things [74:29] that personally for you by yourself. If [74:32] your thing is to go to a pond and go [74:34] feed ducks, go do it. You know, to to be [74:37] able to fill yourself up. If you if [74:41] I I know for parents, early parents, [74:44] there's this this mindset of I have to [74:46] be with my kid all the time. I I can't [74:48] ever leave my kid. That I need to just [74:49] be there. [74:51] But [74:52] what you'll find is you'll be so much [74:54] better when you actually go take care of [74:56] yourself and go on that guys' trip. Uh [74:59] go play that round of golf or whatever [75:01] it is that's actually going to [75:03] feed you and fill you up and [75:05] then I can be there for you all the [75:06] more. I think some people's partners [75:09] they don't they don't like that. Some [75:10] people are in a relationship where their [75:12] partner [75:13] cuts out [75:15] as much of these things as they possibly [75:16] can. Yeah. So that they can control [75:18] their partner. I mean we I think we've [75:20] all got a friend in the group chat [75:22] >> Oh, yeah. who [75:23] >> [laughter] [75:23] >> Yeah. [75:24] >> has kind of like seems to have lost all [75:25] their freedom and their autonomy and [75:27] agency since they've been in that [75:28] relationship. [75:28] >> They'd say they're on a leash. Yeah, [75:29] they're on a leash. Like they can never [75:30] come to the thing. [75:33] That's not okay. [75:34] And it appears to be [75:36] a consequence of boundaries. Like not [75:40] reinforcing your boundaries early. [75:44] It appears to me to be a bit of a [75:45] slippery slope boundaries. Oh, yeah. [75:48] Do you know what I mean? Like where you [75:49] like you kind of make a concession and [75:51] because you've made a concession, [75:52] they're more likely to pursue another [75:54] concession. [75:55] And then before you know it, you're [75:57] behind bars. [75:58] >> [laughter] [75:59] >> Alone. Yeah, and and frustrated and [76:01] wondering how you how you got here. [76:04] I know we've spoke about boundaries in [76:06] the past. To me, [76:08] it it ultimately comes comes down to [76:11] am I protecting the priority? So, [76:14] if I know that my marriage is the [76:16] priority, [76:17] I'm going to set boundaries that protect [76:18] that. [76:20] I mean for me in my life right now, [76:22] whether I'm working on a a book or [76:24] speaking or podcast or whatever, [76:26] it's am I setting the boundary up to be [76:28] protecting my [76:30] my family and my relationship? [76:33] So you have to first define what is the [76:36] priority here. So if the priority is [76:38] knowing [76:39] that [76:41] we want to be you and your partner want [76:44] to be in a relationship and you know [76:46] make sure that Thursday is date night. [76:48] Okay, that's nothing gets scheduled on [76:50] date night. There's certain things that [76:52] just aren't movable. The answer's no. [76:54] And when you can have those really hard [76:55] nos, [76:56] it makes filling the time of everything [76:59] else all that much easier. But that's it [77:03] I mean it ultimately comes down to are [77:04] you being real about it or you being [77:06] fake about it? [77:07] In your view, [77:09] you talk about being nice and being [77:10] kind. Um I've heard you talk about this [77:12] in your podcast. [77:13] What's the difference between being a [77:15] nice person and a kind person? And which [77:16] one should I aspire to be? [77:19] Stop being nice [77:21] at the expense of being real. [77:24] So nice is something that we got taught [77:26] really early on. Hey, be nice. Play [77:28] nice. [77:29] And if you [77:32] believe forever and always that being [77:34] nice serves you well, [77:36] you will ultimately serve it. [77:38] You will people please. You will only [77:40] choose to say the nice thing. You will [77:43] Nice is very surface. [77:46] If you went on a date with somebody and [77:48] I was like, "How was the date?" And you [77:50] said, "She was nice." Yuck. Yuck. Yeah, [77:53] does it does that mean that was good? [77:55] No, of course. But you want to say the [77:57] nice thing. And so it becomes very much [78:00] about pleasantries of what's [78:03] something that that is politically [78:05] correct or whatever it is. [78:07] Kind [78:09] is very deep. It's related to the word [78:10] kin. It's it's connection. So where nice [78:14] is concerned about surface, kind is [78:16] worried about connection. [78:18] So [78:20] nice people say, "Oh, I I can't tell [78:21] them the truth. That's that wouldn't be [78:22] nice. That wouldn't be nice. [78:25] I can't say that." [78:26] Kind says, "I care about you enough [78:29] to say [78:31] the truth. That I I care about you [78:32] enough to tell you the truth." So when [78:35] you have the chance, don't choose nice [78:38] at the expense of being real. Choose the [78:40] kind thing. Like if you and I [78:43] were [78:45] in a conversation and I was like, "Oh, I [78:46] could really I could just go, 'Yeah, [78:48] man. That sounds great.'" [78:49] with the decision you're going to make [78:51] because I just I don't want to upset [78:52] you. That that wouldn't be nice. [78:54] versus me saying, [78:56] "Steven, I [78:57] I have to tell you, man. [78:59] This doesn't feel right to me." [79:01] Which one's the kind thing? Of Of [79:04] telling you the actual truth. It's being [79:06] authentic to it. So a lot of people they [79:08] they look back and they're just people [79:09] pleasing. That's all they've they've [79:10] been because they've always chosen [79:12] what's nice. [79:13] Not what's kind. You must get a lot of [79:15] messages from a lot of people pleasers. [79:17] All the time. [79:18] And what is it they want from you? [79:20] They're wanting to know how to stop [79:22] pleasing other people and to start start [79:24] pleasing themselves. Like how how to I [79:27] always say that [79:28] there's not a problem with people [79:29] pleasing as long as you're one of them. [79:31] You know, of [79:33] It's okay to do things that other people [79:36] ask you to do and you want to serve [79:37] other people. I'm not saying it in a [79:39] as a servitude way of I can never have [79:41] any of my own voice. [79:43] It's [79:44] it's where [79:46] you constantly [79:48] are [79:50] put yourself in inconvenient [79:53] places for the sake of other people [79:55] hoping that they will see your true [79:57] value. [79:58] So, they conflate [80:01] the pleasure of others with the value of [80:02] themselves. [80:04] And so, meaning I mean nothing to myself [80:07] if you're not happy with with me. I mean [80:09] nothing to myself if if I can't please [80:12] you. You You want this? Oh, okay, I'll [80:13] go get it. You need this? You You let me [80:15] do this? Oh, I already thought about [80:16] this. You love this. [80:17] And they've forgotten [80:20] their own sense. And so, I I've met [80:22] people that have [80:24] you know, a lot of it's also early [80:26] childhood. [80:27] Right? They they learned that to save [80:29] the marriage between mom and dad, they [80:32] need to be everything to everybody. They [80:33] have to give up. They They've missed [80:35] childhood in order to please everybody [80:39] else. And so, it becomes a a pattern of [80:42] safety. It's a survival skill of knowing [80:45] for me to have to survive in this, for [80:47] me to have worth, [80:49] well, I can't do it unless everybody [80:50] else is happy with me. [80:52] Are there any case studies that come to [80:53] mind of people that have read your work [80:55] and have made real transformations that [80:57] have [80:59] shocked you or made you happy or proven [81:01] to you the profundity of being able to [81:03] take control of conversation? [81:06] We took a a survey, Paul, within my [81:08] membership. [81:10] And it was already I think it was like [81:12] 93% of people with even in the first [81:16] three chapters of my book, it had [81:19] already significantly impacted them in [81:22] their job, their family, and exactly [81:24] what they were reading the book for. [81:25] Because everybody picks it up for the [81:27] conversation they have in their mind. [81:29] You know, they People don't watch my [81:30] content to handle to know how to handle [81:33] the last conversation. They watch to [81:35] know how to handle the the next one. [81:37] And so, to be able to provide the [81:40] results that they're [81:41] wanting [81:43] is a is a is a blessing. [81:46] I've just finished writing my third [81:47] book. I haven't firmed up the title yet, [81:49] but I have started mocking up some [81:51] different designs. And I've been doing [81:53] this with Adobe Express, which is one of [81:55] our sponsors. What I love about Adobe [81:56] Express is that it makes it so easy for [81:58] me to obsess over the tiniest details, [82:00] the typography, the font, the color, the [82:02] text placement. The stuff that might [82:04] sound petty to most people, but actually [82:06] compounds to create something that [82:08] stands out, something that's one better [82:11] than the rest. And designing my cover [82:12] art has reminded me of how many creative [82:14] things I've learned over the year, but [82:16] it's also reminded me that there are so [82:17] many creative minds around me that are [82:19] also sitting on their own secrets. So, [82:21] I've created the one better guide in [82:24] Adobe Express to bring those tips to [82:26] you. And in it, you'll find principles [82:27] from the very very best in their [82:29] industry turned into quick and easy [82:31] practices for you to apply. So, you can [82:33] train yourself to create exactly like [82:35] the best performing teams in the world [82:36] do. Just head over to adobe.ly/onebetter [82:40] to download Adobe Express now. And make [82:42] sure you visit the learn tab to discover [82:45] how you can become one better than the [82:47] rest. [82:48] Is there a particular moment of conflict [82:50] which you stays with you the most when [82:53] you think about a difficult conversation [82:54] in your life? [82:57] Yeah. There was one [83:00] that I I talk about my book that was [83:02] probably the most gut-wrenching at that [83:04] time was me leaving the law firm where I [83:07] was at having to talk to my dad about [83:08] leaving that firm. But that's [83:11] let's say that's in the the book. What's [83:13] fresh for me now, you want to talk about [83:15] that? I mean, what's fresh for me now [83:17] is conversations that I've had with [83:20] my wife, with Sierra. [83:22] And I'm having a hard time [83:27] reaching and she's having a hard time [83:29] reaching for me where [83:31] I kind of just go static. [83:34] Where I do feel sad. I do feel remorse [83:36] or I I'm trying to and I talk I have a [83:39] hard time expressing it. So, the best [83:40] thing I can do that mind is I use my [83:42] words [83:43] to be able to say [83:46] you know, I [83:48] I feel regret for what's happened or [83:49] what I've done. And I may not be showing [83:52] it right now, but I [83:53] this is not something I'm proud of. To [83:55] be at least able to show in my words how [83:58] I'm feeling. So, [83:59] it let's say for example, it's [84:02] about anything related to [84:05] It could be any argument really with a [84:08] a husband and a wife or a spouse or [84:10] partner or whatever it is. [84:11] But we had one [84:13] not too long ago [84:15] where [84:16] we knew we were going to be [84:18] traveling for a bit. [84:20] And sometimes if it's just the two of [84:21] us, what's going to happen? You're going [84:22] to [84:24] you're going to have some spats. [84:25] About probably the dumbest things you [84:27] could probably have a fight about, but [84:28] that's what what happens. [84:30] And [84:32] I said to her, I was like, well, that [84:34] you know, if we do this and do that, you [84:36] know, we'll probably [84:38] we're not probably going to argue about [84:39] it. It's going to be fine. [84:41] And she said to me, she said, well, [84:44] either way it's good. [84:46] Meaning [84:47] if you don't argue about something, [84:48] great. But if we do argue about it, [84:51] that's good, too. To be able to see it [84:53] as a chance to understand each other a [84:55] little bit more, to know each other a [84:57] little bit more. [84:58] And [85:00] it's it's it's not without being [85:03] radically honest um with the person you [85:06] want to be with. [85:08] And that's that's hard for a lot of [85:09] people. [85:11] I had a friend of mine say to me the [85:12] other day that the thing that annoys him [85:13] most about his wife is just like how [85:14] long she takes to get ready. And he like [85:16] really like offloaded it to me in a way [85:18] where I'm like, this is a problem. [85:20] For him? Yeah. She just takes so long to [85:22] get ready. And she's like, which means [85:24] they're always late to things. A lot of [85:25] guys can relate to this, including [85:26] myself. But the way he said it to me was [85:28] was surprising. And I I remember [85:30] thinking, should he just go and have [85:32] this conversation with her? Or is this [85:34] like an illegitimate concern to raise? [85:37] And I think that sometimes with you [85:39] know, because you were talking about [85:40] your experience with Sierra and her [85:41] saying like either way it's a good [85:43] thing. Are all arguments [85:46] warranted? Like is that argument, you [85:48] take too long to get ready and it's [85:49] pissing me off. [85:51] Is that [85:52] a valid thing [85:54] to raise with your partner? [85:56] In therapy, they say if it's hysterical, [85:59] it's historical. [86:01] Meaning if it's really that big of a [86:02] deal, then there's probably something [86:03] deeper going on. If it's really [86:05] affecting you that much, [86:07] it's like those people who say, well, [86:08] he's always pushing my buttons. I ask, [86:10] why is there a button? [86:12] You know, it's if if it's always getting [86:14] you worked up, there's probably [86:15] something deeper that you're not [86:17] noticing. [86:18] It's probably related to something that [86:20] happened when he was a kid. Or something [86:23] that Maybe it's [86:26] Here, let me give a good example. [86:28] You know, [86:29] in and our marriage, [86:32] I'm the spender. [86:33] She's the saver. Okay. [86:35] >> She She can turn a penny to a dime. [86:38] All right? [86:39] She can pinch a penny into a dime. [86:42] And she got really frustrated with me of [86:43] like, why do you always need the nicest [86:45] thing? [86:47] All right? And that's typically if she's [86:49] has an option of several things, [86:51] even if I don't know the price tags, I [86:52] typically end up going with the one [86:54] that's most expensive. And that [86:55] infuriates her. All right? Because she [86:57] she wouldn't do that. She's going to [86:58] wait for it to go on sale. If she could [87:00] have something she really wants, and [87:02] she's just going to track it forever in [87:03] her mind until it goes on sale. And [87:05] that's that gives her a satisfaction. [87:07] Me, I'll just go buy it. [87:09] And I'm not saying I'm crazy uh what's [87:12] I'm not like some crazy spender. But [87:14] this is an issue that has always [87:16] bothered her and bothered me. [87:18] And what we had come to find out, we had [87:22] actually used this with my AI actually, [87:24] but [87:25] what we had come to learn [87:26] is that [87:30] the reason why it affected me so much of [87:33] like, why why do you always choose to [87:34] the nice thing? [87:35] is related to when I was a kid, [87:38] as the oldest, [87:40] I I didn't get much of the the nice [87:43] thing. My My stuff was typically [87:46] hand-me-down from a friend or something [87:47] else or I I didn't get the nice thing. [87:51] And at some point along the way, you [87:53] equate that to your sense of worth. [87:55] And so, when I first had the ability to [87:57] pay for anything for myself, yeah, I I I [87:59] bought the on-brand [88:01] cornflakes. You know, I bought the the [88:04] the on-brand uh medication. [88:07] Because to me, that that was equal to [88:10] how I wanted others to perceive me. And [88:13] so, when she realized that oh, it's not [88:16] just me wanting to splurge or have some [88:18] kind of [88:19] you know, you just think you [88:22] um have to buy the best. It was like, [88:23] no, that's actually it's a reflection of [88:26] when you buy me something nice, I feel [88:27] like you equate that to how much [88:30] value I I hold I'm not worth buying [88:33] something nice for. And so, it was [88:34] related a lot to my stuff. And we got to [88:38] talk the same about her stuff of why she [88:40] doesn't want to buy the thing. So, it's [88:43] It's like that. Having these super [88:45] conversations with your friend of why is [88:47] it bother her when she gets takes [88:49] forever to get dressed, well, most [88:50] likely [88:52] it's related to something in his past [88:53] that's bothered him that he's not seeing [88:57] yet. Or the conversation worth having? [88:59] Yeah, I think it's absolutely worth [89:00] having. If it's bothering you that much, [89:03] yeah. It If it's hysterical, it's [89:05] historical. [89:06] I think that's really good point, which [89:08] is we're all just dealing with [89:11] other people's inner child. Like we're [89:13] all dealing with It's just like me as a [89:14] child facing you as a child. I know we [89:16] look like adults now. I have gray hair, [89:18] but [89:19] it's really still us just playing out [89:21] the stories and narratives from our [89:22] childhood often times. [89:23] >> You're exactly right. They they say in [89:24] therapy the worst thing about parents is [89:26] that they had parents. [89:27] You know, I mean they they it's so easy [89:30] for me just to look at my mom [89:33] and me forget that she had parents. You [89:36] know, that [89:37] what they did to her. [89:39] Rather than me just looking at what my [89:40] parents have done to me. [89:41] You know, and and that's the definition [89:44] of the generational cycle. [89:46] And it's choosing to do something [89:48] different [89:49] with with who you are and who you want [89:51] to be and who how you want to raise the [89:53] next generation. But we're it's it's all [89:56] survival skills. [89:58] It's all childhood trauma that's related [90:01] to when people [90:02] I have a section in my book of [90:04] having people define out [90:07] their own [90:10] the the communication skills they saw [90:12] growing up. [90:13] Because most of the time if you feel [90:14] like [90:16] arguments have to be this big shouting [90:18] match and everybody's yelling and it's [90:20] it's also typically cultural, you know, [90:22] of how certain cultures how they argue [90:25] and how loud it is and if everybody [90:28] versus there's some cultures and [90:30] families that it's very quiet. Like I I [90:34] I'll never forget going to a friend's [90:35] house. I was about seven and his parents [90:39] while we're eating cereal like just had [90:41] at it. [90:42] And I was mortified. Like [90:44] >> Arguing. [90:45] >> Arguing. Arguing. And I mean [90:48] yelling at each other. [90:50] And I am like blown away and mortified [90:53] and my friend is just eating cereal like [90:55] it ain't bothering him whatsoever. It's [90:56] just another Tuesday. You know, and [90:59] whereas I grew up with if my parents [91:02] argued it was going to be in their [91:03] bedroom. [91:05] You know, I knew if they they were going [91:06] to they went to close the door and they [91:07] were going to have [91:09] a conversation that they didn't want us [91:11] to hear. And so everybody has been [91:13] modeled something different where [91:16] the like there's I've seen it on the [91:18] negative side where people feel like [91:22] you don't really love me unless you want [91:23] to fight with me. [91:24] It's because that's all they've been [91:26] modeled. Fights. They have to say the [91:28] most hurtful thing. They need to be in [91:29] tears. They need to be saying horrible [91:31] things to each other for them to feel [91:33] any kind of love. [91:35] And I've also seen it where [91:37] people are wallflowers. They don't want [91:39] to say anything. They want to [91:41] be really hesitant because bad things [91:43] happen when they spoke out at home. [91:46] They they realized that telling the [91:48] truth [91:49] wasn't good for them. They they they [91:51] learned that lies protected them. It's [91:53] interesting when you have one parent [91:54] that conducted themselves in a certain [91:56] way and the other parent was the [91:57] opposite. Yeah. [91:58] >> What then happens to you? Like which [92:01] communication style you then adopt? [92:03] Which parent takes more of an interest [92:05] in you. [92:07] Is where it typically goes. The one [92:09] you're most of the time with. And see, I [92:12] know people who their parents are kind [92:14] of absent but they spend a lot of time [92:16] with their grandmother. And so I know a [92:18] guy who he sounds just like his southern [92:21] grandmother from Kentucky. You know, [92:23] because that's who he spent most of his [92:25] time with. [92:26] And so it's it's who takes the most [92:29] interest in you. It's it's where the [92:31] parents [92:34] But I what I find so [92:36] interesting in communication we talk [92:39] everything is learned from how we were [92:42] raised. [92:43] Is at one point in time there was a [92:44] utility to what you were doing. There [92:47] was a utility to lying. It protected [92:49] you. Protected maybe your mom. Protected [92:50] maybe your dad. There's utility to it. [92:53] There's a utility to manipulating. To be [92:55] able to say things weren't this way in [92:58] order to keep the family together. So [93:00] there was a utility to the very skill [93:02] that you still have and eventually it [93:04] catches up with you. [93:06] What is it about our communication do [93:07] you think that makes us accidentally [93:09] disliked by other people? [93:11] It sounds fake. It sounds fake. And how [93:14] does it sound fake? Give me [93:16] give me some color. Mhm. [93:18] If you want to know the secret if [93:20] somebody's being fake with you, there's [93:21] really three things that you got to [93:23] know. [93:24] Number one [93:26] is what I call [93:27] bestie bombing. Bestie bombing? [93:30] >> Yeah. So instead of like love bombing [93:32] it's bestie bombing. I have people who [93:34] come to me all the time of I feel like [93:36] somebody's being fake with them. And [93:37] what they're doing is is oh my gosh, I [93:39] just we're we're literally the same [93:40] person. Oh, I think we're best friends. [93:42] It's we just met. Like I just we I Or [93:45] you talk we're just standing next to [93:46] each other at the same party and you're [93:47] like oh, we've got to go. Oh my gosh, we [93:50] you're my best you're my soulmate. And [93:51] it's like they [93:53] they give way too much right out of the [93:55] gate of how much they love you. Ah, [93:57] yeah. [93:58] >> And it's it's nothing it's not what [94:00] secure people do. Secure people don't [94:03] attach to you instantly. Is it not a [94:05] form of manipulation? [94:06] No, it's a form of insecurity. It's it's [94:09] a form because if it would be [94:11] manipulation if they actually meant it. [94:13] It they but they don't. It's it's [94:16] these inauthentic relationships that [94:20] all of a sudden it's like oh my gosh, we [94:22] we're we're going to be best friends. I [94:24] I love you so much. And you're like [94:26] I [94:27] I'm I don't even know you I don't even [94:29] know your last name. What are you what [94:30] are you talking about? So I you see that [94:32] a lot. Two is the over compliments. [94:35] We all have this sixth sense to be able [94:38] to sniff out [94:40] if [94:41] that's real or not. Like nobody needs to [94:43] teach you if it's a fake laugh or not. [94:46] Like you know what I mean? Like yeah. [94:48] >> [laughter] [94:49] >> I don't know was that a real or not [94:50] Steve? [94:51] It's so funny yeah, cuz we we think we [94:53] can spot everyone else's fake laugh and [94:54] they can spot ours. [94:55] >> [laughter] [94:56] >> Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. That's exactly [94:58] right. It's like but nobody had to teach [94:59] that to you. Nobody had to say hey, if [95:01] you hear it like this it's a fake laugh. [95:02] No, no, no. We all as humans it's we [95:05] have an ability a sense to go and ah, [95:07] that didn't sound real. That's not a [95:08] real smile. [95:10] You know, people have their like photo [95:12] smile and the real smile. Yeah. And same [95:15] with the the the laughter. Or like [95:18] that's not that wasn't that funny. Or [95:20] they over compliment something. They [95:22] compliment your shoes. [95:23] I mean and then they have really they go [95:26] oh my gosh, I I I love that outfit and [95:28] then all of a sudden they've turned [95:29] their head. You know what I mean? [95:29] They're not really truly engaged in what [95:32] it is. It's just it's it's a ritual to [95:35] them of that's how they have learned. [95:38] Because to me if you have to perfectly [95:40] curate yourself this this sense of [95:42] perfection you you're not getting [95:45] the real human. You're getting a person [95:48] in character. You're getting them in and [95:51] scene. You know, they have to like get [95:54] into it. And so [95:56] it's it's [95:58] it's something that's so so fake every [96:00] every single time. And then I'd the [96:03] third that you have to watch out for are [96:05] the people that aren't willing to [96:08] actually have an interest in you. [96:11] Meaning they never ask anything about [96:13] you. They're only wanting to talk about [96:15] themselves. [96:16] Like have you ever been in a I know you [96:18] have and you're networking in a big room [96:20] and somebody's looking at you and all of [96:21] a sudden they're looking at the room. [96:23] Like they're [96:24] they're looking for who they're going to [96:25] talk to next. [96:27] And you've lost them. And so it's like [96:29] why we're both just kind of here saying [96:31] things. We're going to slow down our [96:32] words so it's not as awkward and you say [96:35] things like yeah, that's that's crazy. [96:38] Yeah, and like while you're both looking [96:40] for somebody else to talk to. But that's [96:42] what happens. You realize you stay you [96:44] come out of focus and they they're [96:45] looking for the next person. A really [96:48] surprising point of [96:50] feedback or compliment someone gave me [96:52] once and it's surprising because I never [96:54] considered it to be something that [96:55] people were noticing is when I do like [96:57] meet and greets and you're meeting say a [96:59] hundred people before or after a talk or [97:00] whatever and they're coming up one one [97:02] at a time. [97:04] I will get DMs [97:05] in the preceding days of people telling [97:08] me that they liked the way that they [97:11] watched me pay attention to someone [97:13] else. Do you get this? [97:14] >> All the time. [97:15] >> Yeah, and it's like [97:16] they're watching how how interested you [97:19] are in the person that's talking to you. [97:21] And I didn't I didn't obviously it's not [97:22] something I thought about before until [97:25] probably had about 20 messages over the [97:26] last [97:27] year or two from people saying and do [97:29] you know what I noticed Steven? How much [97:31] you were paying attention to the person [97:32] that spoke to you. [97:33] >> Right. Not to them. Exactly. They were [97:34] in the line waiting. [97:35] >> [laughter] [97:35] >> But it's the and I just thought that's [97:37] so interesting that we judge other [97:39] people by how they interact with other [97:41] people while we're watching as well. [97:43] Right. And being interested is seen as [97:46] makes you likeable I guess. [97:48] Presence is the highest form of [97:52] authenticity. [97:53] Like I can talk to you, but am I here [97:55] with you? [97:56] Mhm. If I do I have my eyes with you? Am [97:58] I my interested in you? Am I going to it [98:01] do am I easily distracted? Am I have my [98:04] phone? Am I am I really paying attention [98:07] or am I making sure that you know you [98:08] were the most important thing that's [98:10] happening in this moment even if it's a [98:12] glimmer. And even if it's for 30 20 [98:15] seconds and you're doing a meet and [98:17] greet and you're saying hi or are you're [98:18] signing their book. Do you ask them [98:21] their name? Do you use their name? [98:24] Do you look at them with intent of true [98:26] genuine thank you for being here? [98:28] None of this would happen if not for [98:30] you. People are watching the whole time [98:33] and they they they know. [98:35] I mean it's it's it's such a [98:38] It's like what you know it when you feel [98:40] it kind of thing. And to me is it's [98:42] presence. Am I am I truly here with you? [98:44] Because even at the house, you know, I [98:47] you can say I'm home all the time, but [98:49] are you are you just like on your phone? [98:51] Are you just sitting on the couch? Are [98:52] you always reading? Are you [98:55] That's not presence. I'm going to play [98:57] this video on the screen for anyone [98:58] that's watching the video. But it [99:00] immediately made me think of [99:03] this clip that went viral of Miley Cyrus [99:05] and Naomi Campbell. Oh, I haven't seen [99:07] this. They were doing a meet and greet [99:10] together and they were just chatting to [99:12] each other and kind of ignoring the [99:13] fans, and you can [99:25] I just remember thinking this is like [99:27] the antithesis of what we've just said. [99:29] Mhm. [99:30] It's painful to watch. I know it's [99:32] painful for the people. I mean I It's [99:34] several layers of where [99:38] one, it's an area of really [99:40] little forgiveness. [99:42] You know, if you think of somebody of of [99:44] her caliber, so to say, of like her [99:46] celebrity, right? Seen thousands, [99:49] millions. It's happened and is there [99:51] really room for [99:53] just having a conversation with [99:55] somebody? Like if I were if you're her, [99:57] how do you What would be the [99:58] justification, right? If you could just [100:00] pause and say, "What is it?" Maybe you [100:02] say, "Well, there isn't any." Okay, [100:04] that's fine. But let's say one [100:06] when it comes to presents, [100:08] there's really not any room for [100:11] forgiveness. It's It's either you're [100:13] present with them or you're you're not [100:15] because this kind of thing can last [100:16] forever. Second of all, [100:19] people will forget what you did, but [100:22] they'll never forget how you made them [100:24] feel. [100:25] And [100:27] people will remember you, Stephen, of [100:30] they will tell their kids and their [100:32] grandkids of the time that they met you [100:35] and how nice you were, how present you [100:37] were, [100:38] and how you were genuinely interested in [100:41] them. And that makes all the difference. [100:44] If you have one slip-up, [100:46] that's why I say it's it's not very [100:48] forgivable. When when you have one [100:49] slip-up, it's showing applied to all. [100:52] Cuz if you can do it to them, you can do [100:54] it to me. [100:55] The slip-up will also travel much [100:56] further. Faster, too. Yeah, faster. That [100:59] because because I guarantee you, you [101:01] know, you think of all the meet and [101:02] greets that somebody like that has had, [101:04] and has had genuine, real interest. They [101:07] mess up one time, they get tired one [101:09] time. [101:10] Well, then all of a sudden, that's what [101:11] travels way faster. So, but the thing is [101:14] that that's why I say presence is the [101:16] highest form of authenticity because if [101:19] you can take that moment to be truly [101:21] interested in somebody because who am I? [101:25] You know, I'm I'm a guy from a small [101:27] town who made videos in my car, and [101:28] you're going to come to my book signing, [101:30] and you traveled, and you flew in 2 [101:31] hours. Like, why would I not hold up, [101:34] take the line Let me spend 3 minutes [101:36] with you. Can I give 3 minutes of my [101:38] life to talk to you? What are you doing [101:39] here? And so, when you have [101:43] that humility, and there's several [101:45] people [101:47] I know you know many names [101:49] of [101:50] they they forgot how they got what they [101:52] got. Oh, yeah. [101:54] I have a really interesting example of [101:56] this recently where we appointed new [101:59] chairman to our company. He's called [102:00] Nikki. [102:02] And [102:03] incredible guy, he's been at like he's [102:05] been [102:05] Procter & Gamble doing product for I [102:07] don't know, 12 years, then went to [102:08] Boston Consulting Group [102:11] was one of the senior figures at Boston [102:12] Consulting Group for 25 years. And you [102:15] know, he's in the the the home stretch [102:17] of his career. [102:19] And he joined our company, [102:22] and [102:23] he is, you know, he's achieved so much. [102:26] He's He's worked with the biggest, the [102:27] best in the world globally. Right. [102:30] So, he's got the right, one would say, [102:32] >> Mhm. I like that word. [102:33] >> a certain way. [102:34] That's what someone might say. [102:36] But I'm over here in Los Angeles. [102:39] Um he joins the company as chairman, [102:41] and the interesting thing the [102:43] interesting feedback I got, [102:45] I know, 5,000 mi away, [102:47] was a very junior member of the team [102:49] came up to me and said, "Oh, I love [102:51] Nikki." And I was like, "Explain." [102:54] And he went, "He sat down with me [102:56] and gave me an hour of his time." [102:59] That was the reason he loved him. That [103:01] was it. That was it. It was presence. [103:04] And and what what I [103:05] later [clears throat] found out was that [103:06] Nikki went into the company, and there [103:07] was hundreds of people, [103:09] and he sat down with every single one of [103:11] them, regardless of whether you're an [103:12] intern or whether you're the CEO. And it [103:14] always it's always stayed with me how [103:16] much that has mattered, [103:19] how much that has shaped his perception. [103:20] Just Just He's brilliant and everything, [103:23] but disproportionately shaped his [103:24] perception just by [103:25] giving someone the most valuable thing, [103:27] which is just their time. Yes. [103:29] And I'm I mean, maybe it's a a story of [103:33] how to be a good partner. Maybe it's a [103:35] story of how to be, [laughter] [103:36] you know, in the public eye. Right. [103:38] Maybe it's also a story of how to be a [103:39] great colleague or team member or [103:40] leader. Yeah. [103:42] Or just a great human. [103:43] >> [laughter] [103:43] >> I think [103:45] there is um [103:47] when you're always in the habit of [103:48] giving, [103:49] giving then feels a lot like receiving. [103:52] So, when I'm giving my time, [103:54] it also feels like I'm receiving that [103:57] time back. When I can continually have [104:00] that spirit, [104:01] and you have that knowledge of [104:04] humility. They say, "What does humility [104:06] mean?" It means you realize that you are [104:09] just as weird and terrible as everybody [104:12] else. [104:12] When you realize [104:14] I'm I'm the chief worst person there is. [104:18] I'm not better than a single person that [104:20] is in line to to do or attend something [104:23] or sit in an audience. [104:25] I'm no better. [104:27] I've just been through a lot. [104:29] Still been through a lot, and so I know [104:31] a lot. [104:32] And when you have that mindset of [104:35] I want to meet and touch every single [104:37] person. [104:38] If I were to come in here [104:40] and [104:42] only talk to you, [104:44] but not talk to your team? [104:45] Mhm. [104:46] >> [clears throat] [104:47] >> What is What do you think that's going [104:47] to do? When when you can go somewhere [104:51] and not just talk to who's the most [104:53] popular, [104:54] but also talk to who's the least? Like [104:57] it's it is [104:59] You will always get way more [105:01] and for yourself and for the other [105:03] person when you can lower yourself to [105:05] say, [105:06] "Hey, we're just humans in a room. How's [105:08] it going?" [105:09] It's interesting that we [105:11] we're figuring people out by how we [105:13] observe them vicariously. We were [105:14] talking about it in the context of like [105:16] a meet and greet a second ago. Yeah. [105:17] What you said there tracks perfectly [105:18] with that, which is when you walked in [105:20] the room, you didn't just speak to me, [105:23] you also asked Bertha, who's recording [105:25] the podcast today, what her name was, [105:27] and then you said to Bertha, you said, [105:29] "Thank you for doing this." Right. Now, [105:31] isn't it funny that I remember? Yeah, [105:33] and yeah. [105:33] >> Isn't it funny that that was like 2 and [105:34] 1/2 hours ago, and I remember because it [105:37] was really memorable to me that you did [105:38] that? [105:38] >> Mhm. Because not everybody does that. [105:40] Yeah. Not everybody will, you know, [105:41] notice that. Bertha's in the room with [105:43] us, and she's running all these cameras, [105:44] and she's putting it together, but for [105:45] some reason just before we started [105:46] recording, you made a point of asking [105:48] her what her name was, and then and then [105:50] thanking her for doing this today. Yeah. [105:52] Most people don't do that. That funny? [105:54] And as you walk away from today, I'm not [105:56] going to remember like that you you [105:57] walked in and said something nice about [105:58] me or whatever. The most shocking thing, [106:01] and therefore the most memorable, [106:02] because it is the most unusual, because [106:04] it is typically the most overlooked, is [106:07] you acknowledging the other people. [106:09] Yeah. [106:10] And um [106:13] I've noticed this as a paradox that I [106:14] almost need to put words to, but I [106:16] remember [106:18] in [106:19] something I wrote a long time ago saying [106:21] how useless absurdity will define you [106:23] more than useful practicality. And what [106:25] I mean by that is the example I was [106:27] giving was in the context of my old gym [106:30] where they have this massive climbing [106:31] wall in the entrance, and I came home to [106:33] my girlfriend and said, "This is [106:34] incredible gym. It's massive. They even [106:36] have a 100-ft climbing wall in the [106:38] entrance." What I'm doing is I'm [106:40] pointing at the most absurd thing [106:43] to give you a shortcut that tells you [106:45] everything about that gym. Now, if I [106:48] point at the most absurd thing, you know [106:49] the gym is big. [106:50] >> I got chills. Yeah, yeah. So good. Yes. [106:52] If I say there's 100-ft climbing wall, [106:53] you know there's lots of running [106:54] machines, right? So, if I if I when I [106:56] leave here and go, "He was so nice. He [106:57] even spoke to Bertha and thanked her for [107:00] doing the podcast." I'm using that as a [107:02] shortcut because it's the most stand-out [107:04] absurd thing to tell other people [107:07] everything about you. [107:08] >> Yes. I love that. [107:09] >> And this is why we should value the the [107:10] seemingly petty and seemingly small and [107:12] seemingly inconsequential because other [107:14] people don't, therefore it creates [107:16] maximal impact. Yes. That's why the big [107:19] conversations rarely matter. The small [107:21] ones do. It's the small ones with [107:23] strangers. It's the conversations you [107:25] don't have on the stage. It's the [107:26] conversations you have in your driveway. [107:28] It's the conversations you have in your [107:29] backyard, at the coffee shop. It's It's [107:31] the conversations you have with somebody [107:33] passing by in the elevator. Like it's [107:35] those [107:37] That That's what defines the human [107:39] experience. If I were to [107:42] text you a compliment, right? That's one [107:44] thing. But if I were to say, "Hey, I [107:47] just finished lunch with so-and-so, who [107:49] you also know, I got to tell you, this [107:51] person loves you so much." And and I [107:53] share with you what they said about you, [107:55] you're going to take that differently. [107:56] If I wanted to give you Let's say if [107:58] someone were to give me a gift, right? [108:00] But instead, they didn't give it to me, [108:01] they gave it to my kids. [108:04] I mean, that's [108:05] how much more would that define how much [108:07] they care? Right? If it's anytime I go [108:10] on a a stage, I make it a priority that [108:14] I know the guy who's or girl who's [108:16] putting on my the AV system, the lapel [108:18] mic, the everything. I want to know [108:20] their name, on a how how many times [108:22] they've done this today, how they're [108:24] doing, because it's so easy just to turn [108:26] and [108:27] keep talking to who's important while [108:29] and act like they're just doing it. Like [108:30] it's [108:32] when you can truly talk to the people [108:37] that's just a regular person and forget [108:39] that you you don't have to just stick to [108:40] the somebodies. You don't have to look [108:42] always for the somebodies. I used to say [108:44] that I Again, this comes from employing [108:46] a lot of people that we all have [108:47] invisible PR, [108:49] and it's and it shows up in the moments [108:51] that matters the most, but it's built in [108:53] the moments that seem to matter the [108:54] least. Yeah. And the example I always [108:56] think of is being working in the New [108:58] York office many years ago, and getting [109:01] a message from my team member just [109:02] saying, "Oh, [109:03] Jenny's so nice. She just [109:05] Tim tripped over, and Jenny immediately [109:07] got up from her desk and ran across to [109:09] the first aid kit and sorted him out. [109:11] She's so nice. And I'd hear that 3,000 [109:14] mi away. And then a year later I'd be [109:16] sat with Jenny during her promotion [109:18] conversation. Yeah. And that one [109:21] thing she did that small thing she did [109:24] was often the time where I'd go, "Do you [109:26] know what? This person is a certain type [109:27] of person and we should Right. [109:29] >> double down on them." And then I've got [109:30] the opposite as well. [109:32] I've got the a little thing someone did [109:34] to someone who was not necessarily their [109:37] line manager or significant Yeah. And it [109:41] you know [109:42] and even things that happened to me [109:44] years ago when I came up to I walked up [109:46] to someone famous I've [109:48] told this story before it's so crazy I [109:49] told this story on the podcast like [109:51] episode 3 [109:51] >> [laughter] [109:52] >> when no one listened. [109:53] And then um [109:55] like 3 4 years later the podcast got [109:57] bigger and people started listening to [109:59] people go back to the old episodes. Mhm. [110:01] And this famous person tweeted me like 4 [110:03] years later I was like, "I heard you're [110:04] talking about me in the UK blah blah [110:05] blah." [110:07] But it I was I was just sharing it as an [110:08] example for like invisible PR where [110:10] someone I'd gone up to someone famous [110:11] and asked them a question and they just [110:14] like [110:15] bang. Yeah. Like leaning to me. Right. [110:18] And I and I you know I don't know what [110:20] they're going through that day but it it [110:21] always you know Well that's Well that [110:23] brings it around like full circle [110:25] because [110:26] like we just said you can have those [110:28] little moments where [110:30] it's it's the rock wall right where it [110:32] little moments of connection of presence [110:35] of real authenticity of them being with [110:37] you that you'll remember forever. [110:40] And I bet if I had to guess there's a [110:42] moment in Steven at the playground [110:45] growing up that it or a teacher somebody [110:48] in your life said something that was [110:50] nice and you've remembered forever. Oh [110:52] yeah. [110:54] But I [110:56] would also venture to bet Yes, before [110:57] you even said I could I thought of the [110:59] moment. [111:00] that [111:01] >> Oh okay. playground Steven where [111:02] somebody said something [111:04] hurtful. Yeah. Or rude or said something [111:07] about how you look or your appearance. [111:09] Maybe not even recess but sometime in [111:11] your life. Oh yeah. And it was just [111:12] something maybe it was about [111:15] for a lot of people it's like their [111:16] weight or their appearance or their [111:17] looks [111:19] and they've carried that around with [111:20] them forever and that like [111:22] without knowing it that person gave you [111:24] an insecurity for the rest of your life. [111:27] And so it's so wild to me how the [111:30] positive is remembered [111:32] the negative [111:34] is remembered much longer and travels a [111:36] lot farther. [111:38] And I mean it's when I ask that to a [111:40] group that I'm talking to [111:43] there's hands are always way more raised [111:44] for the negative for the one thing that [111:47] the power of your words [111:49] last way longer than than you'd ever [111:51] think. The ripple effect will affect [111:54] people you've never met. [111:55] I mean you think think of the people who [111:57] you've touched [111:58] and the people you've never met but yet [112:00] they have a perception of you [112:03] based three persons down. Mhm. Right? [112:05] And and how I talk to my kids will [112:08] affect how they talk to their kids and [112:09] their kids. [112:11] Children I'll never meet. [112:12] And when you realize that [112:14] how I talk to the person behind the [112:16] cashier affects how [112:19] he or she talks to their kids when they [112:21] go home [112:23] based on what I said will determine [112:25] whether they come home and say, "I had a [112:26] really bad day. [112:28] I had a really hard day." [112:29] And it it's because of what I said [112:31] because I was rude or I was impatient [112:33] because it they didn't get it to me fast [112:35] enough. [112:36] And all of a sudden without knowing just [112:38] as much as the positive last so does the [112:40] negative. It's now I [112:42] what I chose to say is [112:44] responsible for how they're treating [112:45] their own kids. [112:46] And that's what how we are as humans, [112:48] right? Like we the reason why we [112:50] survived is because we're good at [112:51] gossip. That too. We're good at passing [112:54] on stories so [112:55] you know I could tell people before they [112:56] met you if you were a risk. No, yeah. [112:59] >> I could tell you know don't go near him [113:00] don't go near that cave there's Yeah, [113:02] yeah, yeah. [113:03] >> in there that's going to kill us so [113:04] Right. It's a survival adaptation I [113:06] guess in some respects to be gossipy and [113:08] to pass on people's reputations. But [113:09] we've always asked, "What's the news?" [113:12] Yeah. You know people going through town [113:13] from town to town you know you didn't [113:15] you didn't really have a paper it's do [113:16] you have any news? [113:18] So I'm going to push you to close to [113:19] give me [113:21] the five things that you think are most [113:23] important [113:24] for anyone who's striving to be a [113:26] masterful [113:28] communicator conversationalist [113:30] to get what they want out of life. Which [113:32] is really what I think is it is the last [113:35] domino when we talk about body language [113:37] or communication tactics all the things [113:38] we're talking about. I think people are [113:39] trying to get something out of life [113:41] whether it's to have a better [113:42] relationship or to [113:45] be respected or what get a promotion to [113:47] be successful. I think that's probably [113:49] the the output we're looking for. Mhm. [113:51] Ultimately. Do you agree with that? I [113:53] don't want to [113:53] Like what is it that [113:55] what's the last domino [113:56] that people are looking for when they [113:57] talk about this stuff up here? [114:00] Self-worth. Self-worth, okay. Am I Am I [114:03] enough? [114:04] Am I enough? Okay. [114:07] So what are the what are the five most [114:09] important things to summarize if you had [114:10] to give me five? [114:12] The first [114:14] is authenticity. [114:16] If I cannot be genuine with you if I [114:18] cannot be real with you [114:20] then I can be nobody to you. [114:22] And on authenticity [114:24] you know on your bad day are you still [114:26] authentic? At work? Yes. Like if you're [114:29] if you're really [114:31] you know having a bad [clears throat] [114:31] day do you show up to work as your [114:33] authentic self? [114:35] I would say yes. I mean there's [114:36] obviously certain parameters that are [114:38] within social norms of [114:40] just because I'm having a a bad time and [114:42] I'm a bad mood does that give me a right [114:43] to [114:44] rip you a new one uh just because you [114:46] said hello to me that morning? You know [114:48] no but [114:50] I I think that there is certainly a [114:51] space to say [114:53] don't act [114:54] like you're happy when you're not. What [114:56] about lying? Is that a violation of [114:57] authenticity? So a colleague comes up to [114:59] me they say [115:00] "What do you think of my new [115:03] haircut?" And you think it's terrible. [115:05] Yeah. What do you what do you say? [115:08] It's an interesting choice. [115:09] >> [laughter] [115:10] >> Probably what I'd say. So you wouldn't [115:11] lie? No, I wouldn't. I would probably [115:14] change it to where it's I'm glad that [115:16] they like it. [115:17] You know I I don't have to like it for [115:19] you to give it any type of worth. If you [115:21] like it that's awesome. [115:23] Authenti- authenticity as a strategy [115:25] builds trust over time so that's [115:28] a long-term game I guess. Yeah, no I I [115:30] came across some research uh recently [115:32] where it was in social settings those [115:34] that are more authentic are also the [115:37] ones that are more trusted and the ones [115:39] you want to be around more. [115:41] Why do people struggle with [115:42] authenticity? Goes back to this point [115:43] about people-pleasing I guess but [115:45] there is a certain type of person I [115:46] think that probably struggles to just be [115:50] uh [115:51] you know just to show up in all the ways [115:53] that they [115:55] they are [115:56] to be themselves. [115:58] They grew up [116:00] in places that weren't safe [116:03] whether [116:04] physically or emotionally. [116:06] They they grew up unsafe and so they're [116:08] always tense. [116:10] They're always anxious. [116:12] They're always worried about the next [116:13] shoe to drop. [116:14] They can't rest. [116:17] You see people that had come [116:20] from very hard harsh environments [116:23] you'll see the survival skills that have [116:26] come out of that. Um [116:29] it's because they they simply didn't [116:31] have a place to be safe. [116:35] Number two. [116:37] Reduce the amount of distraction. [116:40] Reduce [116:41] distraction. Is that the same as saying [116:43] like increase presence? [116:45] Well that is the the benefit of it. [116:48] Yeah. [116:49] If you want to increase your presence [116:51] you have to eliminate distractions. [116:53] And that means eliminate how often [116:55] you're on your phone. [116:56] I've got some thread here. [116:58] Do you know why this is here? [117:00] Yes. [117:01] Will you explain? Well I mean [117:03] so [117:04] just a piece of very pretty red string. [117:07] And this string is going to represent [117:10] the connection between the two of us. So [117:12] I'll give you the end of it. [117:13] What I just gave you is a piece of [117:15] string and it connects [117:17] between your hand and my hand and it's [117:19] taut right now. So this string right now [117:21] represents the connection between us in [117:24] conversation. It's tight. It's very [117:26] tight. I'm going to ask questions [117:28] throughout this that [117:30] don't think about [117:31] how what the right answer is. Just go [117:34] with what your gut instinct of how it [117:36] feels. So right now it's tight and if I [117:39] look at you in the eye and I say, [117:41] "Steven, how's it going, man?" [117:43] It's going good. Yeah. [117:44] >> Yeah? What was something that frustrated [117:45] you yesterday? [117:46] My haircut didn't go to plan. Tell me [117:48] about it. [117:50] It's just not it's not good I didn't [117:51] like it. [117:52] Do you find that some of the the biggest [117:55] struggles you had yesterday was mostly [117:56] with business or personal or tell me [117:58] something with business. [118:00] Um [118:01] >> [sighs] [118:01] >> the struggles with business yesterday [118:03] >> going to [118:05] Go ahead. [118:07] Okay, so you're on your phone now. [118:08] And the connection has been reduced. [118:12] Um Yeah, so I just pulled out my phone. [118:14] And now I'm looking and what did you [118:16] feel in the line? [118:18] I felt like the [118:20] tightness went it went loose. Yeah, it [118:21] went slack. All right and but that's the [118:24] physical. What was emotionally how did [118:25] that feel? [118:27] It felt disrespectful. Yeah. [118:29] And see if I had just both had both [118:31] hands on it like this. [118:33] Now let's put it taut again and I'm [118:35] talking to you [118:36] and I say, "So what's what are you [118:38] looking forward to this weekend?" [118:40] I'm looking forward to [118:43] No, go ahead. And this is me just turn [118:44] it's still tight. Don't worry it's I [118:45] still I'm connected to you. No, don't [118:47] worry about it. I'm I'm right here. Go [118:48] ahead. Yeah. [118:49] >> [laughter] [118:50] >> Exactly. You see how all of a sudden you [118:51] wanted to let go now. Yeah, yeah, yeah. [118:53] Yeah, for anybody listening. So you we [118:54] both had it tight. I look at my phone [118:57] while still holding it tight where I'm [118:58] saying, "No, no, I'm listening. Go go [118:59] right ahead." And all of a sudden [119:02] you are the one that let go of the line. [119:04] Yeah. And that's something because all [119:05] of a sudden, you gave up on the [119:07] conversation. You didn't want to be in [119:09] it anymore. What do you typically do if [119:11] somebody's at dinner with you and they [119:12] pull out their phone? [119:15] I mean, you look away or you could speak [119:16] to someone else or you Or you pull out [119:18] your phone. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Exactly. [119:20] You It's like they've given you [119:21] permission to now pick up their phone. [119:24] Somebody gets on theirs and you don't [119:26] want to look awkward or odd, so what do [119:27] you You want me to get out yours and [119:29] next thing you know, both of you are on [119:30] your phones [119:31] at dinner. [119:33] We're supposed to be communicating with [119:34] each other and you're just staring at [119:37] your phone. [119:38] Do you think I sometimes think this with [119:39] me being an interviewer having this iPad [119:41] in front of me? I'm like, should I get [119:42] rid of the iPad? [119:44] Maybe I should because I write things [119:45] down while someone's speaking to me and [119:47] I I do worry sometimes [119:49] that if I'm like looking at a particular [119:50] point or fact or whatever, then I'm [119:53] It's a little bit different. So, there's [119:55] a part of this that is [119:57] it's it's a production. We have cameras. [119:59] We have lights. Like this isn't a normal [120:01] just if you and I were having coffee. [120:03] But let's say you and I were having [120:05] lunch [120:06] and I'm talking like this to you and I [120:09] put my phone right here. [120:12] Do you feel a difference? [120:13] >> Yeah, I do. Yeah. Do you feel I'm more [120:14] connected or less connected? [120:15] >> Less connected. Yeah, and if I [120:16] >> priority, not the priority. And do you [120:18] feel any different if I [120:20] flip it over? Yes, I do. And my face is [120:21] it's it's down. Yes, I do. It's a [120:23] signal. Of? [120:25] That you think this is more important [120:27] and you don't want to be distracted. [120:28] Imagine, what would you feel like [120:31] if [120:33] you were on a date [120:35] or got together with a friend [120:38] and you just said, "Hey, where's your [120:40] phone?" He said, "Oh, I just left it in [120:41] the car. I just want to sit with you." [120:43] Yeah, it's incredible. Does anybody do [120:45] that? No. No. Nobody does that. But [120:47] imagine Imagine if right now [120:50] there was [120:52] uh let's say a woman is about to go on a [120:53] date [120:54] and [120:55] she asked the guy, "Where's your phone?" [120:57] And he goes, "Oh, I left it in the left [120:59] it in the car." [121:00] I mean, what kind of What? [121:02] >> kind of weird? [121:03] >> Yeah, almost like, "What? You mean you [121:05] want to be solely interested in me? I'm [121:07] signaling that there's nothing else more [121:09] important than what's going on right [121:11] here." So, it's that's so such atypical [121:13] behavior some people might see it as a [121:14] red flag. [121:14] >> I No, that's probably true. But if I [121:16] have it right here, even if I put it [121:18] face down on the table and I'm talking [121:20] to you, [121:21] I'm at least still having my world, my [121:24] business, my stress, my chaos. It's my [121:26] it's my pacifier. You don't You can't [121:28] ask me to take away my blanket, are you? [121:30] Yeah, yeah, exactly. And so, I'm still [121:31] it's still there in the conversation [121:33] with us. So, even if I put it down or [121:35] put it between my legs or put it in my [121:36] pocket, which I think is much better of [121:39] not letting it come out at all, [121:41] but it's [121:43] what's the strength of the connection? [121:45] Because we've all been that person like [121:47] we just showed with the string where [121:49] they get out their phone while you're [121:50] talking and they're like, "Mhm, yeah, [121:51] yeah. Uh-huh, right? Go ahead." [121:53] And you go, "I don't want this." Yeah. [121:55] You let go because it's like what That's [121:57] this isn't real this isn't real [121:58] connection. So, if you want to be a [122:00] better communicator, you have to [122:01] understand the definition of true [122:04] connection. It's keeping it taught. [122:06] I'm so shocked when I go to restaurants [122:09] with my girlfriend cuz we have a rule [122:10] and this is actually rule that I [122:11] completely agreed with. Yeah, yeah, [122:12] yeah. [122:12] >> Which is like when we go on a date or we [122:14] go to a restaurant, there's no phones. [122:15] Exactly. We're not going to be on our [122:16] phones in a restaurant. [122:17] >> It's mind-blowing. Mind-blowing. [122:19] >> We went to um when we were here We've [122:21] been here all this week and and we went [122:24] to a restaurant, uh Sierra and I, and I [122:26] saw so many couples and people and [122:28] friends and that were just at the table [122:31] and it it was it was dark evening and [122:33] all you see is the glow of phones. It's [122:35] everybody just sitting there on their [122:37] phone. [122:38] It's just it's it's crazy to me. Or or [122:40] the people that are on their couch [122:43] with the TV on [122:45] and both of them are on their phones. [122:47] And and they're supposed to be watching [122:48] a movie together. [122:49] You know, everyone people watches a [122:51] little bit Yeah, that's right. Yeah, [122:52] yeah. So, I'm not going to pretend we [122:53] don't. Yeah, this is that I'm not going [122:54] to do that. I'm going to Yeah, yeah. But [122:56] so, we we will be in a restaurant and we [122:57] just sometimes play a little game where [122:58] we kind of guess how long people have [123:00] been together based on how they're [123:01] behaving. [123:02] >> Oh, I like that. Yeah, that's fun. And [123:03] so, it's it tends to be the case that [123:05] it's the younger couples [123:08] where there's a man and a woman and [123:09] they're both on their phone and I just [123:11] can't believe what I'm seeing. Yeah, [123:12] it's pretty wild. I'm I look I got my [123:14] phone a lot, but if I'm on a date, [123:17] I am not going to be sat there looking [123:18] at a screen while she's sat there [123:19] looking at a screen just in total [123:21] silence. If even if I've known this [123:23] woman for 35 years, Yeah. [123:25] It's become so much of a an emotional [123:28] pacifier. When I don't like the angst of [123:30] having to wait in line by myself, I [123:33] don't like having to sit on the [123:35] the subway or the tube or the metro or [123:37] whatever by myself, I I get out I get [123:40] out my phone. I don't It It prevents me [123:42] from having to have [123:44] dialogue. So, instead, I'd rather just [123:46] look at my phone and watch and scroll [123:48] versus communicating. Like [123:50] it there's Imagine waiting for your [123:53] haircut and everybody in the room is [123:55] actually [123:56] talking to one another like they used [123:58] to. And they'd just be wild to you. [124:00] Everybody in the doctor's office in the [124:02] waiting room, everybody's [124:03] looking at their phone. So, yeah, to me, [124:07] it's such a distraction and that means [124:09] even at the house, too. I think even [124:10] more so when it comes to the house. So, [124:12] that was point number two, which was [124:13] reducing distraction. [124:15] And therefore, increasing presence. [124:17] Three, [124:18] stop over explaining. [124:22] You have to invest in the right words, [124:24] meaning [124:26] if you are constantly just [124:29] rushing words the whole time, [124:32] does it make you want to listen to that [124:34] person more or less? [124:36] Oh, yeah. I mean, you just kind of [124:38] discount it. [124:38] >> Yeah, yeah, all of a sudden, it's it's [124:40] kind of like the that story about the [124:42] boy who cried wolf. Like he You You talk [124:45] so much that at the message gets lost. [124:47] If I'm always [124:49] talking a lot, [124:51] it's easy to tune it out. It's like it [124:53] becomes its own static. But if you [124:55] choose your words, if I'm going to slow [124:57] down. So, how do you How do you stop [124:59] yourself from over explaining? [125:02] Instead of being a waterfall, [125:04] be a well. [125:05] Meaning rather than trying to gush out [125:07] information, get them swept away in your [125:09] message. [125:11] You have a confidence in holding your [125:13] knowledge. If they have a question, [125:14] they'll ask. You're available for the [125:17] question should they want to ask. I'm [125:18] going to give you always exactly what [125:20] you need if I choose to be a well with [125:23] my information rather than just gushing. [125:25] Because when I over explain, [125:27] all somebody's doing is indicating that [125:30] I don't really know if I believe what [125:31] I'm saying or you believe what I'm [125:32] saying, so I need to say more. I notice [125:34] there's such power in when someone asks [125:36] you a question [125:38] taking a moment to think. And actually, [125:40] sometimes I notice some people will [125:41] actually say, "Let me just think about [125:42] that." Mhm. And the minute they do that, [125:44] I'm I'm immediately doing the opposite [125:47] of discounting what they say. I'm now [125:48] actually [125:49] at bated breath to think about to hear [125:51] this very thoughtful, considered thing [125:53] they're about to share with me. Right. [125:55] Whereas you see a lot of people do the [125:56] opposite. The minute they're asked [125:57] anything, it's just like the floodgates [125:59] open and they start filling the silence [126:00] with and they start thinking out loud. [126:02] Exactly. They're They're external [126:04] thinkers. What I teach is let your first [126:06] word [126:08] be your breath. [126:09] Meaning when you put a breath where the [126:12] first word should be, [126:15] hm, everything else [126:17] flows. If I start gushing, [126:20] what I'm signaling is [126:24] you know, I don't Most people wait until [126:26] they're talking to figure out what they [126:27] want to say. Yeah. [sighs] [126:29] And so, they say, "What I mean to say is [126:31] What I say all that to say" [126:33] because they're still trying to figure [126:34] it out. [126:36] But if you were to ask me a really hard [126:37] question and rather than having that [126:39] knee-jerk reaction, I go, [126:41] "It's a good question. [126:44] Let me think." [126:46] Then you're going to be you're going to [126:47] be in it. You're going to know whatever [126:49] is about to come out is actually been [126:51] thought about. It's actually going to be [126:53] something you want to listen to. Now [126:55] you're going to be more curious. Now you [126:57] wait with bated breath of what's going [126:58] to happen. So, when you think of [127:01] business meetings, [127:03] the person who goes, "Oh, actually, uh [127:05] you know, I I disagree with that. If you [127:06] look at our latest studies" and they [127:07] just start blah blah blah blah blah blah [127:08] blah blah blah blah blah [127:09] versus when somebody asks, you know, [127:11] "Steven, what do you think?" And you go [127:14] and you just hold that silence. It's [127:16] like a cliffhanger. Everybody wants to [127:18] hear [127:19] what you said. But people who are [127:21] confident, they don't have to say [127:25] something [127:26] to show they know something. [127:28] They choose their moment. They choose [127:32] their timing. [127:34] It appears they're also the people that [127:35] are most likely to turn around and say, [127:36] "I don't have the answer to that." Yep. [127:39] People who are truly confident [127:42] know they don't always have to get it [127:43] right. They know that they will get it [127:45] wrong. [127:46] Confident people [127:47] Confidence does not mean you have to [127:49] know all the answers. Confidence means [127:50] you know that you don't. [127:52] When you have the confidence of knowing [127:54] I don't know everything, [127:56] all of a sudden, you sound a lot more [127:57] real. [127:58] There's also something about you just [128:00] being the type of person that's willing [128:01] to sit in silence, but also just take up [128:03] more space and time. That signals [128:05] respect. The very fact that you would [128:07] have the audacity to say, "Someone asks [128:09] me a question and I go hm, let me just [128:11] think about that for a second." [128:13] Yeah. It means that I'm not You You [128:15] talked about rushing earlier. I don't [128:17] rush. [128:18] And there's something about quite aura [128:20] about that. [128:21] >> Mhm, there we go. [128:22] >> About the fact that you you you're not [128:23] the type of You're the type of person [128:24] that can just take 7 seconds. Right. Cuz [128:26] you are it's your you're kind of [128:27] stealing 7 seconds [128:29] from [128:31] everyone there. Right. [128:32] >> So, that you can think. [128:34] And you would think that the the harder [128:36] the issue, the more time that is [128:38] necessary. You would think, yeah. And [128:39] instead, everybody's equated it to [128:41] immediate. [128:42] I I think when let's say we're on a [128:46] a ship and it we're in the middle of a [128:48] storm, [128:49] who's the person that they all look to [128:51] to say, [128:53] "I'm freaking out. I'm scared." [128:55] But the captain isn't. You know, they he [128:57] this person knows. He she knows. [129:00] And we're constantly looking for that [129:02] person in times of emotional stress. [129:04] We're we're wanting someone to [129:07] I I'm too anxious, but I can go to this [129:09] person because in times of crisis they [129:12] say you walk, don't run. [129:14] You know, I I'm when I act like I've [129:17] been there before and I've seen this, [129:20] I'm telling everybody else, "Oh, well, [129:23] all of he's not worried, I shouldn't be [129:25] worried. If he's not upset, I don't have [129:26] to be upset." And a lot of doctors, a [129:29] lot of professionals that deal with [129:31] conflict and crisis management, [129:34] it's their job [129:35] to be as calm as could be because if [129:38] they [129:39] reacted in a way that set you off or set [129:42] you on edge, well, then there's no [129:43] there's no anchor and then it's [129:45] and then it's a bad place to be. But [129:47] yeah, just having that Let me think [129:49] about that for a second. [129:51] Has a different tone of, "Oh, wow, this [129:53] person [129:55] they know who they are. They I don't [129:57] rush. That's just not what I do." It [129:59] reminds me of [130:00] every time I've had turbulence on a [130:01] plane and I've looked at the flight [130:02] attendant to see if this thing is going [130:04] down. That's so [laughter] good. Yes. [130:06] I've done that I I can't tell you how [130:07] many times I've done that where I'm [130:09] looking at the the hostess like just [130:11] walking going still passing out snacks [130:13] and not bothered. I'm like, "Okay, if if [130:14] he's not bothered, [130:16] We do that in conversation every day. [130:18] We're we're looking for [130:20] the calm flight attendants. We're [130:22] looking for the anchors, the captains, [130:24] the people who in times of stress and [130:26] turbulence in our life we can look to [130:28] and say, [130:29] "If they're okay and if they're good, [130:30] then I'm then I can be good." And when [130:32] you can be that person for others, [130:34] You're a leader. Yeah, always. You are [130:36] the leader. Mhm. This is probably the [130:38] defining trait of I think people that I [130:40] have employed over the years that I [130:41] would consider a leader or not a leader [130:43] is how different they are when [ __ ] has [130:46] hit the fan. Yes. And if there is [130:48] seemingly no difference [130:50] in the way they're conducting [130:51] themselves, leader. Yep. Emotional [130:54] regulator. They bring the temperature [130:56] down. [130:57] And then you have the inverse. [130:59] Where the minute any kind of sign of [131:01] trouble, there's stress, there's [131:03] there's overwhelm and it's contagious. [131:05] And what they need is the calm flight [131:07] attendant to regulate them. [131:09] >> Right. So, I think and people I think [131:11] who want to be leaders in their [131:13] professional lives should really think [131:14] about this. Like, how do you show up [131:16] when things are hard? I I always tell [131:18] the story of one of my friends called [131:19] Oliver who when I employed him [131:22] must have been 7 8 years ago. Okay, he [131:24] wasn't my friend when I hired him. But [131:26] the defining trait of Oliver was that [131:29] he would deliver me [131:32] good and bad news [131:35] uh the same. Yeah. With the same sort of [131:40] nonchalant calm [131:43] demeanor. So, he'd walk up to me and [131:45] say, "You know, we've just signed Uber [131:46] across America. We're going to be the da [131:48] da da." And then the days where [131:50] everything was on fire, he'd walk up to [131:52] me and say, "Same kind of chat?" I'd [131:53] say, "Yeah, yeah, cool." He'd say, "Just [131:54] so you know." And then he'd deliver some [131:56] of the worst [ __ ] I've ever heard in my [131:58] entire life. But he'd do it in such a [132:00] calm way that I both I was calm [132:03] and I thought he had it under control. [132:05] Right. And I remember always thinking, [132:07] "I need to put more people under this [132:08] guy Mhm. because he's going to bring us [132:10] down." And so, I just think as employers [132:12] I I I I wouldn't have known [132:14] that my boss or my employer is thinking [132:16] this unless someone had said it to me. [132:17] They're watching how I deal [132:19] with what with things when [ __ ] hits the [132:21] fan. They're always watching. [132:22] >> Always. I mean, you take people that are [132:24] are watching you and your team. You have [132:26] large team. When when you are [132:28] um upset and anxious, [132:31] everybody feels it. It spreads. [132:33] [clears throat] [132:33] But if you're the one that's calm, it [132:36] that spreads, too. And so, it's [132:40] And and you have to get to the situation [132:42] where if you're upset, [132:44] then people know it's something to be [132:45] upset about. You know, of if [132:49] you know, I had um a friend in college. [132:52] He was [132:53] upset about everything. I mean, he just [132:54] was a hothead. And he'd get upset about [132:56] the smallest things. How can you [132:58] possibly tell the difference between [132:59] what is a small thing and a big thing if [133:01] you're always having the same level of [133:04] reaction? [133:06] But if you have a calmness, [133:08] and let's say then you have an explosion [133:10] because it happens cuz you're human, [133:12] that's when people know, "Oh, this is [133:13] something serious." Mhm. Because if you [133:16] always operate at a 10, nobody's going [133:18] to appreciate it when it's really an 11. [133:21] When you think about like military [133:22] generals and leaders, they also have [133:24] this other side to them which is [133:26] they do all also protect the standard. [133:28] And I think this there's a there's a [133:30] balance that's almost needed here [133:31] between [133:33] being nonchalant in those moments where [133:34] something bad's happened, we can't [133:35] control it now, and then how you defend [133:38] the standard. So, like you watch the [133:40] military barracks or whatever when [133:41] they're going through training, these [133:42] leaders are like screaming at them about [133:44] the standards, about the buttons, about [133:46] iron your shirt, make your boots clean. [133:49] And so, [133:50] it appears on one end that they are [133:52] petty about something. And they are you [133:54] know, they are about these leaders are [133:55] emotionally You look at football [133:56] managers. Yeah. Or sporting managers. [133:59] Yeah. They they almost exist in a bit of [134:01] a dichotomy which is like [134:04] knowing when to be controlled and then [134:05] knowing when to [134:08] be [134:09] emotionally seemingly emotionally [134:11] irrational about something. Yeah, and I [134:12] think those [134:14] in those [134:16] um specific situations are also part of [134:18] a system. You know, this is a system [134:19] that they've seen produce the outcome [134:21] that they want. So, they know that [134:23] there's a utility to having that big [134:26] reaction or there's a purpose behind it. [134:29] What I find is the negative is when you [134:31] have people who [134:33] there's not a utility. They just they [134:35] don't have the words. The leaders who [134:38] let's say curse a lot because they don't [134:41] really have the vocabulary. You know, [134:43] they they would rather [134:46] have big emotional reactions. [134:48] But [134:49] when you have that type of language [134:51] that's is not going to show that you're [134:53] in control of your emotions, you're just [134:55] less believable. [134:57] All I had to do was brain dump. Imagine [134:59] if you had someone with you at all times [135:02] that could take the ideas you have in [135:04] your head, synthesize them with AI to [135:07] make them sound better and more [135:08] grammatically correct, and write them [135:10] down for you. This is exactly what [135:12] WhisperFlow is in my life. It is this [135:14] thought partner that helps me explain [135:16] what I want to say, and it now means [135:18] that on the go, when I'm alone in my [135:20] office, when I'm out and about, I can [135:22] respond to emails and Slack messages and [135:24] WhatsApps and everything across all of [135:26] my devices just by speaking. I love this [135:28] tool. And I started talking about this [135:29] in my behind-the-scenes channel a couple [135:30] of months back, and then the founder [135:31] reached out to me and said, "We're [135:33] seeing a lot of people come to our tool [135:34] because of you. So, we'd love to be a [135:36] sponsor. We'd love you to be an investor [135:37] in the company." And so, I signed up for [135:39] both of those offers, and I'm now an [135:40] investor and a huge partner in a company [135:42] called WhisperFlow. You have to check it [135:45] out. WhisperFlow is four times faster [135:47] than typing. So, if you want to give it [135:48] a try, head over to whisperflow.ai/doac [135:52] to get started for free. And you can [135:54] find that link to WhisperFlow in the [135:56] description below. [135:58] So many of us are pursuing passive forms [136:01] of income and to build side businesses [136:03] in order to help us cover our bills. And [136:05] that opportunity is here with our [136:06] sponsor Stan, a business that I co-own. [136:09] It is the platform that can help you [136:10] take full advantage of your own [136:13] financial situation. Stan enables you to [136:15] work for yourself. It makes selling [136:17] digital products, courses, memberships, [136:19] and more simple products more scalable [136:21] and easier to do. You can turn your [136:23] ideas into income and get the support to [136:26] grow whatever you're building. And we've [136:28] just launched Dare to Dream. It's for [136:30] those who are ready to make the shift [136:31] from thinking to building, from planning [136:34] to actually doing the thing. It's about [136:36] seeing that dream in your head and [136:37] knowing exactly what it takes to bring [136:39] it to life. Enter to win $100,000 for [136:41] your dream. All you have to do is share [136:43] what it is. Learn more at dare to [136:45] dream.stan.store. [136:48] So, that was number three. Yeah. [136:50] Stop over-explaining yourself. [136:51] >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. The second one was [136:52] reducing um distractions, and the first [136:54] was authentic. Number four. Know [136:57] [snorts] how to deal [137:00] with their sadness. [137:05] A lot of people are hurting [137:07] that you don't know are hurting. [137:09] And a lot of people are grieving that [137:10] you don't know are grieving. [137:12] Whether it's the holidays, whether it's [137:14] a [137:16] an important date or event that you [137:18] don't know about in their life and [137:20] they're hurting and grieving. If you [137:22] really want to be a top-level [137:23] communicator, you need to know not to [137:26] say not only when the times are good, [137:27] but also when the times are are bad. [137:30] And how does how does one be there for [137:32] someone when they're going through their [137:33] moments of sadness? Is there any [137:34] principles that one should think about? [137:36] Yeah, when somebody is grieving, [137:40] what you do not do [137:42] is begin with, "Let me know if." [137:47] If you if if what you are about to say [137:50] begins with, "Let me know if," [137:52] it's the wrong thing to say. [137:54] Let me know if you need anything. [137:56] Let me know if I can do anything for [137:57] you. [137:58] I I just just let me know. Anything you [138:00] need, let me know. [138:02] All you're doing is giving them a chore. [138:04] This person's already grieving at this [138:07] moment. They [138:09] It's they're going through something you [138:10] don't even know how to feel. [138:12] And you're now giving them a chore of of [138:14] they're supposed to be on their own [138:17] to have the ability to pull out their [138:21] phone, text their need to you? [138:25] It that's never going to happen. Have [138:27] Have you ever had somebody who say, "Let [138:29] me know if you need anything." actually [138:31] let you know that they needed something? [138:32] Never. Never because you've now now [138:34] you've made it [138:36] more comfortable on you and now more of [138:39] an obligation on them. [138:41] And we go, "Well, you know what? I said [138:43] all I need to say. I Let me know if you [138:45] need anything. Let me know how I can [138:46] help." Right? When all you've done is [138:49] just given them an obligation. You've [138:51] you've burdened it even more. Of course, [138:53] they don't want to burden you. They [138:54] don't want They don't even want to They [138:56] don't even want to live in some of these [138:57] moments. They They don't want to exist. [138:59] They don't know how to do it. And [139:01] saying, "Let me know if" isn't going to [139:03] help them. Instead, [139:04] here's what you do when somebody's [139:05] grieving. [139:06] You do the thing. Whatever you thought [139:09] about doing, go do it. [139:11] If you wanted to bring them dinner, [139:13] or said, "Let me know if you need any [139:14] food." Just go get them food. Go do the [139:16] task. Go run the errand. Go show up and [139:19] do their laundry. Go [139:21] mow their yard for them. Go do the [139:23] thing. [139:24] If I really want you to be there for me, [139:27] and you really want to be there for the [139:28] other person, [139:29] you don't have to ask. You just go do. [139:33] And second of all, I find a lot of time [139:35] people [139:36] who are with somebody who's grieving, [139:37] they don't know what to say. They want [139:39] to say something. Like, I I want to say [139:41] something, but I don't I don't really [139:41] know what to say. I just I feel [139:43] uncomfortable. [139:44] What I say is not going to be enough. [139:45] And so, they just stare at their phone [139:46] and they kind of text out a sentence and [139:48] they delete it cuz they don't really [139:49] know what to say. [139:50] The best thing to say is just to [139:52] validate how you would assume it's going [139:54] to be feeling for them. [139:56] Nobody deserves [139:57] what happened. That This is totally [139:59] unfair. [140:00] I can't believe that this has happened. [140:02] Nobody deserves this. [140:04] Be Be able to express and confirm [140:08] that what they're feeling is exactly [140:11] what they should be feeling. Don't go in [140:13] with the Oh, at least they're in a [140:15] better place. [140:16] Hey, you know what? Everything happens [140:17] for a reason. That's not the right time [140:19] to say that. If ever. To To be able to [140:22] try and [140:23] make them feel better of, "Oh, you know, [140:25] I just at least they're, you know, not [140:28] Is there anything I can do?" [140:30] Any of that kind of stuff. It's like, [140:31] "Yeah, I know you can do. You can bring [140:33] that person back. That's what you can [140:34] do." But that's not going to happen. You [140:35] can't do that. And so, you catch [140:37] yourself in a corner where you genuinely [140:39] have an interest. Like, how many times [140:40] people say, "You're in our thoughts [140:42] You're in my thoughts and prayers. [140:43] Thoughts and prayers, you know, praying [140:45] for you." [140:46] And they haven't once sent up a prayer. [140:49] Right? They're just saying it. If you [140:52] really mean it, text out the prayer to [140:54] them. [140:56] Text the prayer. Dear God, I'm I just [140:58] ask that you be with Steven right now [140:59] with what Send the prayer to them. [141:03] Why Why not encourage them in that [141:05] versus just saying, [141:06] "Hey, just keeping you in my thoughts." [141:09] If you are, then text them, "Thinking [141:11] about you. No need to respond." [141:14] You think just putting it in a Facebook [141:16] comment is going to do enough? Just [141:18] "You're in our prayers." [141:20] That's That's not connection and that's [141:21] not authentic. That That's That's the [141:24] easy shortcut. I think I've spent my [141:26] whole life struggling with those moments [141:28] where some something bad has happened to [141:29] someone or they've been through [141:30] something and [141:31] >> Yeah. you you found out over text [141:33] message and you don't know what to say. [141:35] You don't know what to say. You're like, [141:38] "I'm so sorry. Um and [141:41] uh the amount of times I've written [141:42] something and then deleted it and [141:43] written something and then deleted it [141:45] and I actually [clears throat] got some [141:46] feedback from Samir, um who is a a very [141:50] well-known YouTuber creator. And he's [141:52] he's part of a YouTube channel called [141:54] Colin and Samir. Hit Their Their house [141:56] has burned down in the Palisades fire. [141:58] And I'd say, what, four, five, six [142:00] months later, he came up to me in New [142:02] York and said, um [142:04] "Thank you for the message you sent me [142:06] because [142:08] it was specific." [142:10] And I And I've got There's a clip We [142:12] have a clip of it cuz we were recording [142:13] at the time. We were I'd just come off [142:14] stage and he was [142:15] at his at his event in New York and he'd [142:17] come up to me and said it. And it always [142:18] stayed with me that he remembered six [142:20] months later I didn't even really [142:21] remember the message I sent. [142:23] He remembered six months later that when [142:25] his house had that burned down, they'd [142:27] both just had I think they both had like [142:29] less than 1-year-old kids. And then both [142:31] of the houses had burned down. [142:33] I sent him something specific I could [142:35] help him with. [142:36] I can't I I can't remember the details [142:38] of what I said, but he came up and said, [142:40] "Thank you for sending me something. [142:41] Lots of people sent me messages, but I [142:43] remember you sent me something [142:44] specific." That hits the theme of when [142:46] you [142:47] stop trying to be [142:50] what's most convenient to you [142:53] and start doing what might be just a [142:55] slightly little bit more uncomfortable, [142:57] a little bit more work. The choice to do [142:59] something different and be more specific [143:02] in the thought. [143:03] To to not just say, "So sorry to hear." [143:06] Mhm. [143:07] Right? That's That's [143:09] That's injustice. To be I mean, that's [143:11] That doesn't even touch it. [143:13] But if you were to say You were to say, [143:16] "What is happening is totally unfair." [143:19] Like [143:20] Agree with it. Be specific with it. Same [143:22] thing with It's the same with [143:24] compliments. [143:25] The more specific it is, the more [143:26] genuine it is. [143:28] The person that you remember the longest [143:30] is the person who's able to be [143:32] right there with you and say exactly [143:34] what you're feeling in that moment. [143:37] >> a genuine offer to to support. A real [143:40] Yes. [143:40] >> And also, not not as you said at the [143:41] start, not an offer that they have to [143:43] accept. [143:44] >> Yeah. Because no one accepts them. Yeah. [143:47] The Or the make it a condition that they [143:50] have to reach out to you in order to you [143:52] consider giving it. Yeah. [143:54] >> Instead of just doing it. Or or even [143:57] when you feel that like I don't really [143:59] know what to to say, but I'm You know [144:01] what? If I were them, this is what I'd [144:04] want. And go do the thing. Otherwise, [144:09] don't say it if you don't mean it. I [144:11] mean, that's just the To me, that's a [144:12] sign of [144:15] you're you're not their person. Because [144:18] there's so many people that are just [144:20] fair-weather friends. That they they [144:22] want to be there and and be part of the [144:24] success, but when your face is on the [144:26] floor and you're at rock bottom, [144:28] the people you'll remember are the [144:29] people that show up. [144:31] Amen. I've heard that so many times from [144:33] my guests on this podcast when they talk [144:35] about their hardest moment. [144:36] And it's always who who showed up in [144:38] that moment that Um Number five. If you [144:41] want to be a better communicator, you [144:43] have to know how to handle the insults, [144:47] the backbiting, the dismissive, [144:50] the belittling, the patronizing, the [144:52] words that people use to try and inflict [144:55] pain. [144:57] What do I do? [145:00] If you want to handle somebody who's [145:01] trying to hurt you with their words, the [145:04] first thing you have to do [145:05] is have a bunch of [145:07] silence. [145:08] Or it's 5 to 7 seconds of [145:11] nothing. Make it Make it enough to where [145:14] it's uncomfortable, where they they know [145:15] this is not going to be fun. Number two [145:18] is you ask them to repeat it. [145:22] I need you to say that again. [145:24] I need you I I need to repeat that. Most [145:27] of the time people can't do it. And [145:29] number three, [145:30] if I need to, I ask them, "Did you mean [145:33] Did you mean for that to sound [145:36] rude? Did you mean for that to sound [145:38] short? Did you mean for that to sound [145:40] upsetting?" And what it does [145:42] is allow you to be able to [145:46] operate in a way that [145:50] doesn't allow their words to hurt you or [145:52] to touch you or to cut you. [145:56] Whenever somebody is saying something [145:57] that's to belittle you or insult you, [146:00] they're they're putting a big spotlight [146:02] on themselves and they're hoping to [146:03] throw it on to you to get your reaction. [146:05] So, they're going to I'm going to say [146:06] something hurtful to you and then it's [146:07] like, they're turning the spotlight [146:08] right to you. And then when you ask a [146:11] question, when you [146:13] have [146:14] a bunch of silence, it allows their [146:16] words to kind of echo back to them. And [146:18] a lot of people will, before they even [146:20] have to say anything, they'll go, "I I [146:21] shouldn't have said that." The more [146:23] silence you have, the more awkward it [146:25] becomes and they kind of have to take it [146:27] back. They realize you didn't take the [146:28] bait. But when you put the spotlight and [146:30] you ask the question, "Did you Did you [146:32] mean for that to [146:34] embarrass me? [146:36] Did you mean for that to sound hurtful?" [146:39] They can't bear the thought of saying [146:41] yes to that. So, they have to tweak it. [146:43] They have to fix it. They have to go, [146:45] "Oh, no, no, no. I mean, what I mean [146:46] what I meant to say was" and they [146:49] they go a different way. Now, if they [146:51] were to double down and say, "Yes, [146:53] that's exactly what I meant." You could [146:54] just say, "Thank you for letting me [146:56] know." I was thinking about like the [146:57] neuroscience of what's going on there. [146:59] Yeah. When you get someone to admit that [147:01] they're hurtful, [147:03] um I remember interviewing some [147:05] neuroscientists who talked about this [147:06] idea of cognitive dissonance, which is [147:07] where like [147:09] we all have a perception of who we are. [147:10] Mhm. And I guess by what you're doing [147:13] there, you're [147:15] creating the cognitive dissonance, which [147:18] is the cognitive mental discomfort, by [147:20] making me kind of look in the mirror at [147:22] who I [147:24] who I just acted like. If I I don't [147:26] think I'm a hurtful person. If I say [147:28] something super hurtful and then you ask [147:30] me if I meant to be hurtful, you're [147:32] immediately like speaking to my [147:34] identity. [147:34] >> Yes. And I don't want I'm not a hurtful [147:36] person. Right. And that's causing the [147:38] the dissonance, which is the sort of the [147:40] disparity between who I think I am and [147:42] how I just behaved. Yes. [147:43] >> And so, I have to alleviate one of them. [147:45] I have to make sense. [147:46] >> Nobody believes they're on the side of [147:48] bad. They always think they're on the [147:49] side of good. So, you by you saying that [147:51] to me, I immediately have to confirm [147:53] >> Right. that I am a a person who's intent [147:56] on hurting others. Yes. That's not at [147:58] all what I wanted to say. I just wanted [147:59] to gaslight you a little bit. [148:01] >> [laughter] [148:01] >> I just want to cause you pain. Yeah. And [148:03] so, in that moment, it's [148:05] what they're thinking and feeling is, "I [148:06] want you to hurt like I'm hurting. I [148:08] want you I want to feel the control cuz [148:11] I don't have a sense of control now. And [148:12] I'm feeling a certain way. I'm upset. [148:14] So, if I can make you upset, well, then [148:16] I can have Now I can feel better and [148:18] more justified about how I'm feeling." [148:20] And so, some people will, especially the [148:23] manipulative ones, they'll be upset, say [148:25] something to make you upset, and then [148:27] turn around and go, "I don't know why [148:28] you're so upset. [148:30] I'm I'm fine. I'm just fine. I don't [148:31] know why you're you're so upset." And [148:33] because they've just left you in it. Now [148:34] Now they All they've done is just pass [148:36] it on to you. They I I don't like this [148:38] feeling, so now I'm going to give it to [148:40] you. And I'm I'm totally good. What are [148:41] you talking about? [148:43] I had a situation in a gym a long time [148:45] ago where I was on a machine and a guy [148:47] he said that these all these machines [148:49] were his so he wanted to use them all. [148:51] And he just came up to me, this was a [148:53] long long time ago, [148:54] and he was so like [148:57] out of pocket. Like he was You talked [148:59] about being in the pocket. [149:00] Super emotional within like 15 seconds, [149:02] this sort of slightly older gentleman, [149:05] and basically like asked me if I wanted [149:07] to have a fight. And it was so bizarre [149:09] to me that I felt like an observer and I [149:11] generally Anybody else seeing this? No, [149:13] it was just me and him in the gym. And I [149:14] was so I was I felt like David [149:16] Attenborough. Like I was just like [149:18] And I didn't and I [149:20] inadvertently did what you said which is [149:21] my tone didn't change at all. I spoke to [149:23] him like this. I was like, "Did you just [149:24] ask me for a fight in the gym?" [149:26] >> [laughter] [149:26] >> I was like and then the more I cuz I [149:28] asked genuinely like genuine questions [149:31] and it immediately disarmed him. Yes. I [149:33] was like, "Don't do that to strangers in [149:34] the gym." Oh my god. My [laughter] tone [149:36] was so low. Yeah, but that's what it is. [149:38] IT'S ARE YOU OKAY? [149:40] YOU KNOW, it's you know, I'm having to [149:41] like have to check on them for a second [149:43] because most of the time when you're [149:44] hearing them yell and and say ugly [149:46] things, what they're truly signaling is [149:49] I'm not okay. [149:50] It's there's always something else [149:52] that's going on. I've done it before [149:53] where somebody said something hurtful [149:55] and I said [149:57] How did you expect me to respond to [149:58] that? [150:00] Or how were you wanting me to respond to [150:01] that? Or how did you think I was going [150:03] to respond? [150:04] And it's [150:05] I've never had it where [150:08] they go, "Well, I expected you to say an [150:09] insult." Like they it's always [150:12] them backpedaling and then trying to [150:14] explain how they're feeling in that [150:15] moment because they they don't know they [150:18] don't know how to to do it. But if I can [150:20] stop, put aside, like you did, your [150:22] frustration, [150:24] and say, "Are you asking me for a fight [150:26] right now?" [150:27] >> [laughter] [150:28] >> You know, are you Is that what you're [150:29] really asking for? That kind of are you [150:31] okay? Kind of thing. [150:33] That'll all of a sudden your frustration [150:34] now goes away. You've changed the frame [150:36] completely. Absolutely. [150:38] Cuz the frame they wanted was [150:39] aggression. Maybe that's the the [150:41] language or the frame that they know as [150:43] the way to solve problems. But you also [150:45] was like in that scenario changed to [150:47] curiosity which was like, "What How did [150:48] that Yeah, anytime you actually have a [150:51] mindset of instead of having something [150:56] Well, [150:57] don't have something to prove, have [150:58] something to learn. And so in that [151:00] moment you could have easily tried to [151:02] prove something. [151:03] Who Who do you think you're talking to? [151:05] Do you know what I You could have played [151:07] that card and said you actually got [151:09] curious of what's going on here. Are you [151:11] asking me for [151:13] Questions are powerful that way. [151:14] Questions are disarming for somebody [151:16] who's trying to be aggressive with you [151:18] because they're not looking for that [151:19] type of [151:21] mirror. They don't want a mirror. They [151:22] don't want to see the ugly that they're [151:25] putting out there. But anytime somebody [151:27] has that very aggressive I have so many [151:29] people who go [151:31] Somebody said this to me and was so ugly [151:33] and said this horrible thing. [151:36] And they're looking for a quick comeback [151:38] which I can give it to them. But if they [151:40] really care about the relationship, I [151:41] say, "Okay, [151:43] I assume they said it at normal volume. [151:45] What's their need? [151:46] Like what are they really they really [151:47] feeling?" Mhm. Cuz if you just respond [151:49] to the reaction, [151:51] you're you're not going to hear the end [151:53] of it. [151:54] And we all have triggers. Same. I got I [151:56] I definitely have mine. I can't I can't [151:58] I can't say anything. I'll tell you one [151:59] of the biggest things that has [152:02] helped me, too, in [152:05] um [152:06] any any If anybody's wanting to improve [152:08] their personal relationships with a a [152:10] partner or anything, [152:12] it's one is understanding [152:14] validate first. [152:17] Frustration comes like next. If I [152:19] respond first with frustration, I'm [152:20] going to lose every time. So it's [152:22] validating. It's saying, "Of course [152:23] you'd feel this way. It totally makes [152:25] sense. I can see how you'd feel that [152:26] way." Acknowledging that it's okay for [152:28] them to feel that way. Otherwise, [152:31] the partner's going to feel like I'm [152:32] being too much. [152:34] And if I'm being too much, then you're [152:35] going to leave. [152:36] All right, it's the it's the same sense [152:37] of abandonment. So if I can hit that, [152:38] you're not being too much. I have the [152:40] capacity in the I can be elastic in this [152:44] relationship because [152:45] I'm not going to be my best self all the [152:47] time, too. But if I can give you a safe [152:48] space for you to be messy and me to be [152:50] messy, then you're actually not going to [152:51] have that relationship. Number two, it's [152:54] understanding that [152:57] resets is your [153:00] Uno wild card. Asking for a reset. [153:03] For if I were to say, "You know what, I [153:05] didn't say that right." [153:07] You know what, can I can I try that [153:08] again? [153:10] I didn't say that the best way, did I? [153:12] You know, I I could have done that [153:13] better. [153:14] As soon as I start and ask for a reset, [153:16] I've never had anybody tell me no. [153:17] Nobody goes, "No, no, you have to stick [153:19] with it right now. Go ahead, keep [153:20] failing." Like we in a video game, we [153:22] wouldn't Why would you keep playing if [153:23] you knew you were ultimately going to [153:25] lose? It's you restart, you try again. [153:27] And so [153:29] giving yourself the grace and the other [153:30] person the grace to have the ability to [153:32] start over again is a necessary part of [153:35] communicating in relationships. And [153:37] three is slice it thinner. [153:40] A lot of the times [153:41] if we're having a big conversation, [153:45] we bring up somebody might bring up the [153:46] past, that past thing, and we just kind [153:48] of add it on and glom it on when [153:51] we start to kind of feel hopeless about [153:53] it. But if I can slice each issue by [153:56] itself and say, "I do want to talk about [153:57] this. [153:58] I want to address what's in front of us [154:00] first." That makes everything go a whole [154:03] lot better. But if I can slice [154:05] each part and see the need and validate [154:07] that, [154:08] I've always seen that go better. And on [154:10] that first point about [154:12] um [154:13] how you engage with your your partner [154:15] during [154:16] conflict. One of the most useful things [154:18] I heard recently was a clip I actually [154:20] saw of Brené Brown talking about when [154:22] she comes home after like a long day. [154:24] Yeah. [154:25] She will tell her partner how much she [154:28] has in the tank. [154:29] >> It's so good. And so she'll turn to her [154:31] partner and say, "Listen, [154:33] I've got 10%. [154:34] >> Mhm. I can't do this today." Right. And [154:37] I'm I remember getting the clip and [154:38] sending it to my partner because it's [154:41] those that's some of the vocabulary that [154:42] probably would have really helped a lot [154:44] of my relationships which is just first [154:46] expressing where I'm operating from. So [154:48] good. [154:50] And I don't think anybody is going to be [154:52] on the receiving end of honestly I've [154:53] got like 10% in the tank today and go, [154:55] "No, I want to do this now." Like [154:56] [laughter] Exactly. Well, using [154:58] percentages in conversations incredibly [155:00] helpful. Both in relationships, like [155:02] Brené mentioned, I've seen, you know, I [155:03] got 10%. You got 40%. Let's put it [155:06] together, we're going to make it work. [155:08] But I at least know where you're coming [155:09] from. Same thing at work. [155:11] Right? I've seen what I encourage is [155:13] when people are in a meeting, they can [155:15] put out an idea. [155:17] Right? Rather than going, "What if?" [155:20] Because what happens is everybody just [155:21] starts to kill it, you know, they start [155:23] pointing arrows at it cuz it's [155:25] because it wasn't their idea. So we need [155:27] to take it down. But if they come out [155:29] and say, "Look, [155:31] 30% of an idea." [155:33] Then what happens magically is that [155:35] everybody else wants to join in. [155:37] So if I were to say, "Look, I Steve, I [155:39] got 20% of an idea. I need your help [155:41] with the other 80." All of a sudden you [155:43] take it as a [155:45] "Oh me, I can I can do that." And then [155:46] everybody else starts to build it up [155:48] rather than trying to tear it down. Or [155:50] even if in conversation if I say, "Look, [155:54] I know I'm not going to have the right [155:55] words. I'm going to have about [155:57] 60% of it." [155:58] Like that at least is me confirming that [156:01] I know what I'm saying is not going to [156:02] always be the right thing to say. [156:04] I wish I did that more. This is um I [156:06] believe this is the clip I'm talking [156:07] about. It was Tim Ferriss. Everyone says [156:09] marriage should be 50/50. It's the [156:10] biggest crock of [ __ ] I've ever [156:12] heard. It's never 50/50. Yeah. Ever. [156:15] And so what we do is we quantify where [156:17] we are. So if Steve comes home and he'll [156:19] be like, "I got 20." Just in terms of [156:21] energy. [156:22] >> Just energy, investment, kindness, [156:25] patience. I'm at a 20. And I'll be like, [156:28] "I'll cover you. I got you, brother. [156:29] Like I'll pull the 80." [156:32] Sometimes we come home which we've done [156:33] a lot. My mom has been sick and I'll [156:36] say, "I've got 10." And Steve would like [156:38] 2 days ago said, "I'm riding a solid [156:41] 25." So we know that we have to sit down [156:44] at the table anytime we have less than [156:46] 100 combined [156:47] and figure out a plan of kindness toward [156:48] each other. Ah, I love that. Yeah, [156:50] because the thing is marriage is not [156:52] something that's 50/50. A partnership [156:55] works when you can carry their 20 or [156:57] they can carry your 20. [156:59] And that when you both just have 20, you [157:01] have a plan where you don't hurt each [157:03] other. [157:04] So good. That's the mistake I've made [157:06] multiple times. Oh, but I try and solve [157:07] big problems with It's a mistake we make [157:09] every day. Yeah, I mean for me and with [157:12] Sierra and I [157:13] is usually if we're in a part of an [157:14] argument, typically arguments end pretty [157:16] quickly. But the ones that go long, [157:20] it's [157:21] sometimes, you know, I just don't feel [157:22] like it. You know, I I could give an [157:24] apology, you could give an apology. So I [157:25] just don't feel like I don't feel like [157:26] being sorry right now. I will later, but [157:28] I in the moment I'm just [157:31] I I I I just got this stuff in me and [157:33] I'm not ready yet. And so what happens [157:36] for me and what's been so helpful is [157:38] when I'm aggravated at that edge and I [157:39] don't want to give a thing is to say, [157:44] "My battery's in the red." Like we say [157:45] in the red because of [157:47] iPhone. It's like I'm Once I know I'm in [157:49] that place, [157:50] we know to time out because it's or else [157:53] you'd be 2 hours in and you're still Now [157:55] you've just said way worse things, you [157:57] know, that you're going to apologize [157:58] for. And so often when the quicker you [158:01] can get to a time out, like if you want [158:03] to know how well a relationship [158:05] communicates, [158:06] look how often they take time outs [158:09] because time outs are [158:11] I mean, they're [158:13] the the amount of value you get in just [158:17] a pause and then even 5 minutes [158:20] coming back to it, you have a different [158:22] like, "Okay, here we go." Like a fresh [158:24] fresh start. Like why would you leave [158:26] somebody on the field [158:28] for 3 hours and never give them a rest? [158:32] And you think I can't I we do it [158:34] physically, but I'm not going to do it [158:36] mentally? Like if you [158:38] if you want to know [158:41] the key to the relationship [158:43] the the metric that is the most valuable [158:47] key to a relationship [158:49] is that the measure [158:52] the quality of the conversation [158:54] is equal to the quality of the [158:56] relationship. Said differently [158:59] the quality of the relationship is equal [159:01] to the quality of the communication. [159:03] You look at all these couples that are [159:06] divorcing. [159:08] Okay? [159:09] Are the couples that are in bad states. [159:14] It's because they were okay in the [159:16] positive [159:17] but they don't know how to do deal with [159:20] the negative. So, it's it's the measure [159:21] of not just can we talk about the happy [159:24] stuff. [159:25] The if you talk I I talk to these [159:27] elderly couples have been married for 50 [159:29] years and I say what's what's your [159:31] secret? It's it's not can you be happy [159:33] in the happy? It's can you how long can [159:36] you sit with the hard? And how how long [159:39] can you be in the in the sad times cuz [159:41] those are going to happen. And I see [159:44] that so many with the people there's so [159:45] many people who communicate with me or [159:48] message or and they're going through a [159:49] divorce or they have been divorced. And [159:53] you realize that [159:54] it's it's not often that they fell out [159:56] of love. They fell out of communication. [159:59] They they stopped talking to each other. [160:03] This is I think one of the great myths [160:04] we're sold when we get into our first [160:06] relationship is we think that the sign [160:08] of a good relationship is the lack of [160:10] conflict. But if you've ever been in a [160:12] long relationship, I think over time you [160:14] start to figure that [160:15] it's not the amount of conflict. It's [160:17] like [160:18] it's it's how one manages the conflict. [160:20] I read a quote which I've never [160:22] forgotten which said you can predict the [160:23] long-term health of a relationship by [160:25] whether each cut heals to 101% or 99%. [160:29] I does your conflict make you stronger? [160:31] Yeah. And if I look back through the [160:33] conflict that I've had with like my [160:34] partner that I've been with a long time [160:35] now [160:36] I go it has actually [160:39] deepened the roots. Yeah, it has to. [160:42] Like it's been productive conflict. Mhm. [160:44] You know, which has made us stronger. [160:47] Um and that and that in part is because [160:49] of many of the things that you talk [160:50] about which is like [160:52] trying not to win every argument. [160:54] >> Right. And other things in your book. [160:56] It's Yeah, but that's Sierra [160:58] uh that's what Sierra talks about in [160:59] either way it's good. Like it's the [161:01] conflict you want conflict in your [161:04] relationship for the growth. It is rare [161:06] that you can have individual growth [161:08] alone. It has to be relational. 100%. [161:12] >> to be with other people. I I I can read [161:13] a book on how to do something but until [161:16] I do it [161:18] it's it's a totally different game. So, [161:20] I I I learn relationally with things and [161:24] with other people and places but for [161:25] sure relationship I mean there's just no [161:28] there's no other way to go around it. [161:30] You have to have the conflict if you [161:31] want to be [161:33] if you want to be better. And I I've [161:34] seen so many times where the people [161:37] um [161:38] they [161:40] face in their hands. They don't know how [161:41] to talk to one another [161:43] because they gave up on trying to repair [161:47] but they're they're all in on trying to [161:49] blame. [161:50] And so when you are trying to [161:53] kind of undo what has to be done that [161:55] makes it all the more difficult because [161:57] it's just so many years where there [161:59] could have been repair but [162:00] there [162:02] there hasn't been and in turn that [162:04] really hurts the relationship. I read a [162:05] recent study [162:07] that [162:08] the biggest predictor of the child's [162:11] well-being within the parental [162:13] relationship [162:15] is not whether they were married or [162:16] divorced. It was [162:18] how they deal with conflict. [162:21] I mean cuz how many people have had [162:22] parents that are still together but [162:24] fight terribly. [162:25] >> Yeah, my god. Yeah. And and and in in [162:27] fact should probably maybe not be [162:28] together. Yeah. Or those that they're [162:32] divorced but communicate great. Yeah. [162:35] And they never put their child in the [162:37] middle of it and didn't use the child as [162:39] a a mail carrier between the two. The [162:41] the be able to do that is [162:45] I mean you're you get to change the [162:46] whole trajectory of of a child's life. [162:48] At some point we have to forgive our [162:49] parents, right? Yeah, that's that's the [162:51] truth. [162:52] Like you said like they were they were [162:54] kids too raised by parents that [162:57] >> This is their first time still doing it, [162:58] you know? [162:59] >> [laughter] [163:01] >> You have a workbook on its way in March [163:02] 10th [163:04] called The Next Conversation Workbook. [163:05] Yeah. [163:06] Practical exercises for arguing less and [163:08] talking more which really takes [163:09] everything that you wrote about and [163:10] turns it into an actionable blueprint [163:13] framework for people that really want to [163:15] embed these habits into their lives. [163:17] Um I'm going to link that below. Is that [163:19] available for pre-order? Will it be? [163:21] You'll be a pre-order link so we'll put [163:22] that in the description below. You're [163:23] also working on some AI stuff which I [163:24] think is interesting. Yeah, thank you. [163:26] >> So, I'm about to release an AI of just [163:30] my content. So, it has my book. It has [163:32] my podcast. It has my any of my social [163:34] clips. It has it all. And so, it's a [163:37] small language model to where it's [163:40] everybody can have their own personal [163:41] communication expert in a 24/7 kind of [163:45] thing is what they have on it. But where [163:47] people get to practice. So, what I love [163:49] about it the most is let's say you you [163:52] say I'm about to go into a important [163:54] meeting and I want to sound really [163:55] confident. [163:56] What can I do? Or I'm about to have a [163:58] my spouse isn't listening or really [164:02] upset. What do I got to do? You apply [164:03] those right in that that moment. And [164:06] gives you a different way of [164:07] prospecting. Different way of seeing [164:09] things from a different view. Or [164:13] what I definitely what I've uh [164:15] like is to tell it [164:17] to be a boss. Be my boss who's really [164:20] mean and arrogant. And let's do an [164:22] exercise of how to respond to this [164:24] situation. And [164:25] you test is that response going to be [164:27] the best response and allow it to kind [164:30] of have a [164:31] a different way of practicing things [164:33] that maybe you need to be ready for cuz [164:35] some people need to be ready for the [164:36] hard response. [164:37] I'll link that below, too. Yeah. You can [164:40] have a play with that and sign up. I'm [164:41] excited. [164:42] We have a closing tradition where the [164:43] last guest leaves a question for the [164:44] next. Question left for you is who are [164:47] you most dying to meet and why? Oh, [164:50] that's a great one. [164:53] Um [164:55] person I would love to meet right now [164:59] is probably Brené Brown. That's probably [165:02] it really the fact that you brought her [165:04] up. The reason why is because [165:07] I know that she's been in the space a [165:08] long time. [165:10] And I feel that [165:12] when she shares stuff it's very genuine. [165:15] Like there's no guessing that she's [165:17] real. Yeah. [165:18] >> She's about as real and raw as authentic [165:20] as you can get. She's also a Longhorn [165:23] Texas Longhorn fan which I'm a fan of. [165:25] But I feel like when and this is just me [165:28] personally [165:29] I kind of got pushed into this field. [165:32] And [165:34] you you always look for people [165:36] that are your own anchors in life of who [165:38] you'd want to be a mentor kind of thing. [165:40] And that's somebody who's [165:42] I feel like has [165:44] been in the the world and and knows some [165:47] things and has just some incredible [165:48] knowledge that's helped a lot of people. [165:52] She's most certainly authentic. She's [165:54] incredible. Yeah. Well, I listen if [165:56] people haven't bought your book which is [165:58] almost nobody. [165:59] But if there are still some people out [166:00] there that have haven't bought this book [166:01] I highly recommend it. I think I am [166:03] included in my WHSmith collection as [166:05] well [166:06] in the UK. You did. Thank you so much. [166:08] Such a smash hit success. [166:10] It's a success on two dimensions. It's [166:12] sales and its impact. Thank you. And um [166:15] it's also incredibly accessible so it's [166:16] not like a complicated science book and [166:19] it's written for normal people that are [166:20] going through very real relatable normal [166:22] problems. [166:23] And um I think that's why it's been so [166:25] successful. I think you you approach [166:26] these challenges from a very real place. [166:29] And maybe that's in part why it's been [166:32] so wonderfully received and so relatable [166:34] is because [166:36] you know, you're a you're trial attorney [166:38] that's bringing this stuff to the masses [166:39] but [166:40] you're not like a PhD scholar who might [166:42] have drew drawn up the drawbridge [166:44] because they they they spent all their [166:46] life in academia. And I think the way [166:48] that you communicate is so relatable and [166:50] resonant that it's no wonder that you're [166:52] you've been on an absolute unbelievable [166:54] tear the last couple years. It's [166:56] phenomenal like crazy crazy incredible. [166:58] So, congratulations and thank you from [167:00] all the people that you've given Thanks, [167:02] man. a little bit of light to a little [167:03] bit of um [167:05] you've empowered them with information [167:07] so that they can live the life that they [167:08] they deserve to live. talking Justin. I [167:10] appreciate it. Thank you, Stu. [167:12] >> [music] [167:15] >> If there's anything we need, it is [167:17] connection especially in the world we're [167:19] living in today. And that is exactly why [167:21] we created these conversation cards [167:23] because on this show when I sit here [167:25] with my guest and have those deep [167:26] intimate conversations, this remarkable [167:29] thing happens time and time again. We [167:31] feel deeply connected to each other. At [167:33] the end of every episode, the guest I'm [167:35] interviewing leaves a question for the [167:37] next guest. And we've turned them into [167:39] these conversation cards. And we've [167:41] added these twist cards to make your [167:43] conversations even more interesting. And [167:44] there are so many more twists along the [167:47] way with the conversation cards. This is [167:48] the brand new edition. And for the first [167:50] time ever, I've added to the pack this [167:52] gold card which is an exclusive question [167:55] from me. But I'm only putting the gold [167:57] cards in the first run of conversation [168:00] cards. So, get yours now before the [168:02] limited edition gold cards are all gone. [168:04] Head to the link in the description [168:05] below. [168:07] >> [music] [168:13] [music] [168:15] >> Oh [168:20] Oh [168:22] >> [singing] [168:23] >> Oh [168:24] >> [music] [168:25] >> Oh [168:28] Oh