Scott Adams is a trained hypnotist, and (as he frequently reminds listeners) - world-famous for his Dilbert comic strip. While his comic strip is something I was familiar with, it never directly appealed to me because of its focus on the corporate world I was not a part of. Still, I found it amusing but quickly forgot about it.
I kept seeing Scott Adam’s name pop up here and there across the internet and decided to listen to one of his many podcasts through periscope. I had not even heard of the platform until then or known how popular of a figure Scott was through it. He seemed always to have a refreshing and optimistic take on what otherwise appeared to be bad news to some, and so I decided to pick up one of his books, Loserthink, to learn a bit more about what he had to say. The main reason for my interest was my lack of communication skills, and since communication seemed to be something he was intimately familiar with, I might as well see if I could learn a thing or two from him.
Loserthink
To start, Scott introduces readers to a concept I feel like I must have known about before reading his book, but I couldn’t put a word to it, which he calls, you guessed it, Loserthink.
Loserthink isn’t about being dumb, and it isn’t about being underinformed. Loserthink is about unproductive ways of thinking.
Adams, Scott. Loserthink (p. 2). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
The book is broken into chapters with examples and reasons to examine a topic or idea from a perspective different from your own thinking process. To that end chapters included are ones that delve into certain concepts and how to think about them as a psychologist, artist, historian, economist, or scientist would (to name just a few). This approach not only engaged my fascination with all of these disciplines but also introduced me to the layman's misuse of these oft-repeated, but poorly understood, ideas.
The first example of loserthink introduced in the book is mind-reading, where an individual assumes they know what another is thinking. When someone is engaged in mind-reading, they will look at what someone else says and interpret it based on what they think the other person believes. This form of loserthink is probably the most important because of the conflict that such thinking produces. For instance, two reasonable adults could agree on some fundamentals, and one of them can state an opinion that the other has only heard espoused by some extremist. Suddenly they are in disagreement because person B imagines that person A has come to their conclusions in the same manner as the extremist and not perhaps from some other way. People rarely pause to consider that there is an overlap in views and opinions across all groups. Of course, somewhere, a terrible person agrees with an idea or belief that a not-so-terrible person holds. Engaging in mindreading does not make a productive conversation, and it certainly doesn’t lead to any real understanding.
If your complaint about other people involves your belief that you can deduce their inner thoughts, you might be in a mental prison. We humans think we are good judges of what others are thinking. We are not. In fact, we are dreadful at it. But people being people, we generally believe we are good at it while also believing other people are not.
Adams, Scott. Loserthink (p. 24). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
Another concept that stood out to me is occam’s razor, which many may understand at the philosophical or scientific principle that states, “the simplest solution is usually the best solution.” I often hear this principle employed even by people whose content I enjoy to explain how they have reached their conclusions on a given topic. However, the simplest explanation for one person will be different from what seems to be the simplest explanation for someone else who either has a different thinking process or has other information. It does not mean one person is right and the other wrong: they could both be incorrect. Additionally, while something may appear to be the best solution to a question you posed to yourself, someone else out there in the world may have information relevant to your question, and you may be unaware of that information. What looks simple to you feels like a complete idea, but perhaps it is too simple because it lacks additional information.
In science, the simplest explanation that fits the facts is preferred. In life, we are all under the illusion that our explanations of things are the simplest ones.
Adams, Scott. Loserthink (p. 33). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
Scott’s recommendation that people consider thinking like someone they are not is one of the first strategies they teach in civics or debate courses in schools: know the other side. Not simply what your side says about another, but actually understand their position and what data informed their conclusion because you can’t argue against something that you don’t know. When I hear occam’s razor used in defense of a position, the first thing I consider afterward is the quote or truism from Einstein: “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” I believe there is a point at which we all risk being reductionist and miss things because we reach a conclusion based on our simplistic subjective explanation. Once having reached that conclusion, we determine information outside of it no longer relevant and further turn a simple answer into an oversimplified one by excluding input. New information can only add clarity if it is willing to be heard.
CREATIONIST: God created everything. Simple!
SCIENTIST: Evolution created everything. Simple!
Adams, Scott. Loserthink (p. 32). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
One last loserthink I will share that I appreciated is one that everyone has likely encountered if they have spent even 5 minutes on social media: the slippery slope. While it is a known logical fallacy, people still use it to make their case about current events. Scott puts it thus:
My objection to the slippery slope argument is that everything is a slippery slope until it isn’t. In physics, a body in motion will stay in motion until it meets an equal and opposing force. Our experience of life is a lot like that. Literally everything would be a slippery slope if not for counterforces. So look for counterforces to predict how far a thing will slide.
Adams, Scott. Loserthink (p. 73). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
Do you fear communism is on the rise in your country? Maybe it is. Maybe it isn’t. Just because some aspect of society has become socialized does not immediately mean that it will inevitably lead to socialism. Think some criticism about an election is an insult to the democratic process and a sign of “the end of our democracy?”Again, just because something appears to be a step toward your fear doesn’t mean that it will occur.
For example, in hindsight, there could be a circumstance that you perceive to be a slippery slope, where something you thought would lead to another did. But what might have happened instead is that the counterforces were much further downslope, and other events - that you are unaware of - may have propelled matters along the way. Let’s pretend that Canada or the U.S. or the U.K. fell to communism. Someone looking at it from afar may think that social welfare programs predicted that this would occur. However, what is that person overlooking? They are ignoring other factors along the way besides the one thing they believed to be the cause. In complicated systems, it likely is never just one thing that leads to the dramatic change at the end.
Beyond Loserthink
Besides the book Loserthink, Scott Adam’s has authored a few other books that deal with topics ranging from persuasion, success, and more. He has also made a foray into fiction with his book God's Debris, where he introduces a thought experiment of a man who happens to know everything and asks the reader to question what is wrong with the omnipotent man’s explanations of reality. Three more things I would like to address briefly that I learned from engaging with Scott Adam’s body of work so far:
Talent stack- Besides being a hypnotist and a self-made comic writer, Scott Adam’s has been a management trainee, computer programer, budget analyst, commercial lender, product manager, and supervisor. He has reinvented himself many times over and offers advice on how others can do the same. One of the ways to achieve success is through increasing one's talent stack. This means that if you aren’t particularly drawn to one career or another that perhaps you should increase your skillset across different domains that you believe you can achieve. The result is an individual with a unique set of skills that likely will set them apart. He also recommends that people focus on their systems for success rather than goals, such as setting aside time each day to perform a certain studious task and consistently increasing that skill. This is precisely how fitness experts recommend people build the habit of becoming more active.
Reframing - One of my favorite things I discovered on Scott Adam’s Locals page is his subscriber-only micro-lessons. These run the gamut from many of the things mentioned above, but recently I appreciated one he did on the idea of reframing your perspective. If something in life looks like it is a bad outcome and is getting you down and depressing you, reframe it. Look at it from a different perspective and even as an opportunity. I have been prone my entire life to depression and anxiety, and I don’t doubt that this is a handy trick, especially if practiced regularly.
The Scott Adams Life Strategy Degree - Because of Scott’s unique skillset and background, he has created what his fans have jokingly referred to as the LSD Degree. I have a suspicion that the acronym is a persuasion strategy by the author. The books recommended to read are the following:
Influence by Robert Cialidini
Pre-suasion by Robert Cialidini
The Power of Habit by Charles Duhigg
Impossible to Ignore by Carmen Simon
How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big by Scott Adams
Win Bigly by Scott Adams
Loserthink by Scott Adams
Apocalypse Never by Michael Shellenberger
From the list, you will notice that he lists three of his own books. Having garnered a sense of his personality, tactics, and knowledge from one of the books recommended, I am acutely aware of his inclusion of three of his works in a list with others. Not only is it a persuasion technique to get readers to see his works in a positive light because of the smart company he keeps, but also an attempt to convince us to buy more of his books. It’s a neat trick. I will risk engaging in loserthink to suggest that Scott thinks that anyone who reads what he recommends would recognize the techniques he’s employing here. Check out this book and others if you feel inclined to do so after reading any of this.
I like this review and will be posting it on my Thinking Objectively blog. http://thinkingobjectively.blogspot.com/ Another example of Loserthink that I see all the time is arguing by analogy.