We are all individuals... Yes, I remember that one. Thanks for the recollection.

Brilliant

"Life of Brian"...a true classic

.

@@Oziriz .

Imagine how bad a bad idea is when a minority think it up

A bad idea is a bad idea no matter how many people think it up

There’s more chance of a bad idea coming from one person , The majority are usually right

@@johnnyreggae969 no because that one person that started the bad idea isn't gonna be the only person with a bad idea because there are TONS of ppl with bad ideas and SOME people may think that a BAD idea is a GOOD idea and then next thing you know you'll have a MAJORITY of people with BAD IDEAS therefore the MAJORITY ARE ALWAYS WRONG

Trump

But it is so much more comfortable doing the same thing over & over again and complaining! :D

That's an excellent comment and observation of the persistent policies of the democratic party in the United States Policies not working but making everything worse, and the response is, were not doing enough of it

​@@tarekyared4404sounds like a particular group of people and their political party in the United States

I think Funding is the key... and bloodlines.

Many not so successful people made the same thing. But nobody writes books about them.

Einstein was very good in this. catching an idea and driving it to the very end

@Nonconformist_ZH in these days, yea

True, but it’s also about knowing when to give up on an ideas. Entrepreneurs can hold on too long to ideas and lose a lot of money in the process on something that was never valuable. A good entrepreneur knows when to pursue, continue, and to discard a business idea.

Similarly Clemens said "what most people know ain't so."

Hahaha, a good one...

It's staggering how many people here totally missed the main points, but I guess that also proves that the majority are most inclined to do what they consider normal, and thus never exceed the average box. The people who moved the world never did like everyone else were doing at their time. A collective mind is only good at doing what they already know works, but a mind that stands outside of what is currently being practiced, is the one mind that has the capability to innovate and change our perception of what we do and how we live. Every majority factor is based on safe options and predictability and consistency, which in the end results in a status quo situation that just keeps itself running, nothing more and nothing less.

Daniel Kemnitz Incredibly well said.

@@Real_MisterSir I understood the point at the end of the vedio but i do see einsteins whole class passed.😂

Stop making sense. Thank you, the Majority

@@Real_MisterSir its because they just read the title

"If you ask questions, they start by banning." (Bryson Gray)

"It would be wrong to think" Vladimir Lenin

Very timely

Nothing wrong if all think a like like for example that they like Donald Trump

well I wouldn't say no one is thinking

It’s called the bell curve iirc ;)

OR *_"Mass psychology"_* .. As a former investment Banker and day trader... what some of us know is that Market movement is 97% dependent on what the masses "THINK IS TRUE" NOT what is ACTUALLY TRUE. That's why of course some companies that haven't made a dime, losess year after year *are often the highest valued.* 🤣🤣

There is thing called measurable performance. Perhaps we could try that?

@@desim-arch Sure - what is measurable performance then?

I guess that's why you should know what you are doing

Great quote mate ! perfect example

and younger women and older whiskey.

@@LanternOfLibertyI'll take those. Don't bother with the horses for me.

Reminds me of today when people want faster cars while UFOs are real.

@@LanternOfLiberty I can't think of a better interpretation for life Good Sir

Yes, because humans do have limits.

You're so high

@@jasondashney Normal humans have normal limits. Anything above normal becomes hard to know where that limit begins, and where it ends.

*Mind blown

Rokas S - there is no box

no one can dispute a flawless presentation

That was well performed indeed. Sadly the rhethorics lacked and tricked mostly the incompetent and the lazy. But those are the customers you want if you're doing a MLM scam.

he said uhmm

He repeated sentences several times. He avoided filler words by being repetitive! It's the same.

The only thing useful in this talk was the enumeration of the 4 sides of the box.

I should have read a few more comments...I just posted the same quote!

Why?

BINGO

By nature the majority is independent of an arbitrary sense of right or wrong.

We humans all need oxygen to survive. That is not only a universal opinion, it is a fact--no oxygen, you die. That is a MAJORITY position. Uhhh...oops.

Great speaker, abysmal script. Totally lackluster, uninspired thinking. Disliked

Wasn't a speech, It's a lecture

Said "ladies and gentleman" too many times, and honestly the content of the talk itself was lackluster.

The face he makes every time he's proposing a weird idea is cracking me up. 5:55 6:49 9:21

@@warsilver99 yeah, I guess rewatching it I see what you mean, still, dude knows how to speak

Yes, in other words, don't get caught in the four boundaries of the box, ie. technological boundaries, legal boundaries, physical boundaries, and moral boundaries....

The trick is to laterally think... type nlp and chunking up and down into a search engine to familiarize yourself... It's really cool and simple to do...

@@stephenmani8495 Yea. Don't let moral and legal boundaries keep you from greatness.

@@jacobshirley3457 - Question is whose morals? Trump's morals? Biden's morals? Or Mormon morals? Taliban morals? (yeah, Taliban is one of the most outspoken and clearest on its 'morals!). Or Buddhist morals? Chinese morals? Vegan's morals? Or the Vietnamese morals who eat dogs? This morality list can go on....You see the problem? So, once the world's population can agree on a list of morals that EVERYBODY can agree on, THEN I might consider sticking to somebody else's moral boundaries. Until then, No.

what they usually mean is demonstrated by taking 9 dots arranged in 3 rows and 3 columns. Connect all 9 dots with 4 lines without lifting your pencil off the paper.

you are 100% correct, ive been trying to tell my family and friends the value of Christian Nationalism. there is more evidence supporting Anglo Saxon and christian superiority than there is evidence we landed on the moon. even our ancestors from the 1800s KNEW that the skulls of african slaves vs the skulls of white people could NOT support the size of a civilized brain. it is a shame that the majority were willing to risk civil war back then to ignore this fact and they are on track to do it again. Praise trump and our lord jesus christ. Glory to the anglo race!

+dan b , then there is still a majority who thinks majority is wrong!

Their actions would prove that is a lie

They do

Then that can be considered "common sense" ..⊙﹏⊙which in its own right is a misnomer

Then they would be right. Congrats. You've just hacked his theory.

But how was that applied in the case of the examples he gave?

Taxi business. How to expand your taxi business in London ensues a lot of thinking. Finding the solution removes the requirement for thinking. to get to the 3% you need to stop ignoring the lack of solutions and simply enduring to the next day. Work your head at finding the right questions for you and your business and then solve them. It is really quite simple in principle. on the other hand I my self believe that the "best 3%" is just a choice of words targeted at a specific audience of overachievers. You don't need to be the best, or even near the "top" to have enough ^^. especially since defining the top is so elusive.

He did make a mistake right there. He tried to imply that you should stop thinking in between the tunnel vision. At least that is how i understood this argument...

Step away from the "bang head in the wall"?

+Powerofriend Ah, thanks. I think I get what you mean. You mean to say that one ought to simply find a solution whereby one doesn't need to worry any further about the solution, right? In that sense, thinking up a solution which eliminates the need for further thinking, so that you can enjoy the rest of your day.

If the subject interests you I can only recommend you to read Blue Ocean Strategy. It's everything he said but put in an applicable framework.

Thats what i did all mylife. But it has to be said, that it is not always safe. For me it is more acceptable to fail with a new idea, than against a competitor, but most people are preferjng to compete in existing boundaries than than to fail outside of them, given the fact, that you are labeled much more negative than if you fail inside the boundaries.

Paul is a false lieing fake apostle

@@schupiluliuma7179 this is so true. This is why I never criticize new ideas as long as they don’t cause harm to people other than ones-self.

@@bylyone23 Blue ocean is a great term to know, but it’s a boundary within itself. You can’t be “too blue ocean” or even the best invention or breakthrough can fail. This mainly applies to new technology or products. For example, making a flying car not look like a “ground car” would vastly reduce the chances for adoption by people. As an inventor myself, this is really frustrating when you HAVE TO worsen a design or idea so that it is less intimidating at the cost of functionality or cost.

Walter Lippmann, I read earlier. Who stole it from whom, I now wonder.

@@klausmuhlmann7589 🤔🤔🤔

@@manfredziernhold6046 It is in fact an adage that predates Lippmann and Valentin. It may have been coined by Benjamin Franklin -- difficult to say. The "nicht viel" (not very much) is certainly Lippmann. Franklin says flatly "... no one is thinking." Valentin's and Lippmann's dates overlap. Did they read each other? -- difficult to say.

they can do a Ted Talk - but can they do the Ted Walk?

you mean it was a bit abstract and beating around the bush style... i get it. a lot of people think that way it seems but i still liked this one for some reason even though it didnt present anything tangible

@@jvincent6548 okay buddy

@@chinmaygupta1530 Oh it's tangible. I sell online, and trying to crack the market in things "everyone" buys is impossible. The big boys own it. Thinking outside the box is the only way to survive. Nothing abstract about it.

@@garyking508 That sounds pretty good. Maybe if the speaker had used examples like the one you gave, the talk would have been more tangible but he only stated the theory, so people not familiar with the concept in real life may have a harder time understanding what he really means.

Wow this made me think, like really. Funny though

yea the majority is worng

The majority of comments didn't even watch the video 😆

Lol 😂 👨‍👩‍👧👨‍👩‍👧‍👦👨‍👩‍👦‍👦👨‍👩‍👧‍👧👪🙆🏻

@@vijnmusic4707 8 years later I see 145 K likes, no dislikes, and I see only positive results which shows me that the majority believe they are in the 3%

The commenter consensus are merely lemmings lined up following one another. The main benefit of lemmings is finding out where the best places to not think are.

Came down here to say that

the term hyperbole is an adjective, not a noun. Nevertheless, your point is well taken.

Think Different - Steve Jobs

@@keithhinchcliffe5629 you must be thinking of hyperbolic? no, hyperbole is not an adjective.

Samuelson baker well said. he starts like this... “majority can be right, but not cause they are majority” when this is the start... you get uncomfortable on what follows ^^...

would you prefer if all these capitalists and multinational companies just did whatever they pleased? Would u prefer to live on Mars and accelerate the destruction of the earth?

Do you even know what totalitarian means lol?

Exactly. I think that it is the part that is quite left aside in his presentation. At the end when he is saying ''As of today that choice is completely yours'', it is only halfway through, if less. Yes, anyone can innovate and think outside the box if they set their mind to, but not everyone will be successful doing it, only 3%. The survivor bias is a fantastic explanation here. Official patent sites are filled with innovative ideas that never made it to market. Although a lot of successful people won't dare say it, a great part of the success is actually based on luck.

@@LtKregorov it's also based on subjective experience alot of the time, if a successful person just happened to get successful, they might blame all the hard work they did while a poor person might have done just as much work and gotten nothing.

@Maxwell Severins Bruh my post is 6 months old like what, i don't even remember what i was talking about. I'll try to respond though

@Maxwell Severins First, innovation inherenerently based on change, and that's what i meant. Second, Survivor bias plays a big role here. I bet there are plenty of people who live and breathe their buisiness, but didn't have any sucess due to simple misfortune. And do you wanna know why you haven't heard of these people? It's because they WEREN'T sucessful in working hard, so they never earned enough to become someone "big" and their voices were never heard. The worst thing about suvivor bias is that it's the suvivors who get to make the rules. In this case, suvivors are people who have the power and influence to speak and be heard.

That's because the key ingredient to success from a start up perspective is timing. If you have the best technology, product or service and it's the either too new, ahead of it's time, or the same or too similar to well estsablished, known existing competitiors. It's not funding, it's not proven management..... It's timing.

oh wow, interesting right

@@murjansconcierge True. They all paid to hear him talk.

At least 97% of those applauding are aspirant 3%ers!

And implies that only the lives of the 3% are valid and truly worth living. No. not part of his majority either, happy to be eternally working on it theses days.

Nothing wrong in being in groups

@@MrNll004 A group can be useful if they are working together with the specific remit of coming up with innovative ideas. But the OP is talking about herd mentality, whereby people in the group don't want to go against set group norms. That kind of situation results in group think, where individuals abandon independent critical thinking, and just agree to think the same thing as the rest of the group. This is a pretty common group behaviour.

well it's not me, so it MUST be you :D :D ooops, there you go, wrong again, maybe we are BOTH crazy :D

“The thought that often drives me hazy is it I or the others that are crazy” In most cases it is both.

Look at me! I did this. And so can you! Ted Talk over.

Knowledge and desire determine success

💪

And getting paid by the guy who thinks outside the box!

The rest of your peers are also goofing off at work, and that’s why you’re not accelerating. Bravo, you fell in the 97%.

LOL. This is one of the silliest videos I have seen in a long time.

This man has inspired me to break food industry norms and never wash my hands after taking dump

I think that *is* the industry norm.

It's a ted-x talk. And it shows. Because it lacks depth and research. And only uses cheap rhetorical tricks. A boondoggle in lack of a better word.

@@Macatho you hit the nail on the head. This is Ted X talk designed for tech bro managers. "Nobody is thinking but me, everybody is lazy but me, if they tell me it can't be done they are just not visionary like me..." mindset. Sometimes there is a reason WHY things are done certain way and that reason is (again, sometimes) because a lot of very smart people spent a long time designing the procedure to do it that way. Sometimes the shortcut is not the safest way, is what I'm trying to say. Yeah, you could do it that way, but if you do it that way, 99% of the time everything will be fine but 1% will lead to catastrophic failure and people might even die because you did it slightly unsafer but slightly faster and "more efficient" way. So your faster and slightly unsafer way was made illegal because of that 1% of catastrophic failures. That's just one part of what's wrong with the talk.

I write angry women - Henrik Ibsen.

@@count7340 No wonder.

@@RogerBarraud what

Dr Stockmann in 'An enemy of the people'

It's not about what is right or wrong it''s about being ahead of the majority of people in a/multiple fields/domains of activity.

You're definitely the majority.

You may not be in a position to change anything in your organization but you have freedom outside work to change things. In your organization you must be at a level where you can tell others what is your vision and ask them to execute it. Not everyone is risk averse but the majority, sadly, is. This is the reason why for the billions we are on this planet our progress almost feels like it's stagnating. Musk comes to mind here, but there are not many like him willing to go against the grain all the time.

@@Bruckner people who look to billionaires for answers are not intelligent.

He is definitely among the 3 percent.

I'm guessing that you wrote this comment for yourself, so you might have better comprehension.. If I'm right i have one question - Does it work ?

I want that accent aswell

I was thinking this as well!

linguaphile he sounds like the Major from Hellsing Ultimate

Makes for a great movie villain.

linguaphile I missed the posh British but I did make the following observation: WWII was around 70 years ago and still ... the presence of a German accent will not get you a laugh no matter how clever your comment.

Yes ! Maybe my giant essay posts will interest you ! apparently large comments too fast and too much makes YT delete them. I replied to @theironherder and @Xogroroth666 and there are heaps more rants on various videos 🤣

A very little part of people will accually recognize their position in this procentage, ironically, the majority think is already in that special minority and that's stoping them to grow up, I see this interesting.

No I am not thinking this. I see this every day how much pain it is to learn something, while you have the pressure to be producite instantly. Its actually quite painfull it feels always that i am torn between long term better solutions and "get something done" its a difficult flower.

97% do at least. And maybe 1/3 of the actual 3%

@@apostolosfilippos there cannot be a shepherd without the sheep

Dunning-Kreuger? (Sp?)

Well, the motivation is that if we provide a good or service in exchange for value, and we rely on that value to live, but someone else innovates first, they outcompete us and we lose our source of livelihood. So society tells you must always keep innovating. Where I personally think this perspective goes wrong is in the way we see innovation as the end goal. It's not a goal, it's a means. If we can improve a process we're already successful at, then we free up more time and resources to do other things - things that we actually want to spend our time and resources on.

@@Munchprime Good point. Yes for example we might direct our time and resources toward things like restoring the ecology of the planet!

You needn´t see it as another box, just become aware of the box you´re in at the moment. That allows you to make conscious decisions with no strings attached

We wouldn't have to constantly do "new and innovative" things. If we took time to figure out all of the possibilites of error of a proposed concept or an idea, and took care of them before we even considered mass production. In this country we throw anything and everything away that's old, becuase we have no use for them because it's NOT "new and innovative" despite the fact that they WORKED and wasn't wasteful or foolish...That's the problem with living in a CONSUMERIST society, everything has to rapidly and carelessly produced for the sake of mass consumption. Nothing made makes people happy or satisfied, cause they're ALWAYS wanting more...

I thought so as well, I thought: "actually I'd like to to some traditional stuff". It's not about being innovative but doing something of quality that you enjoy. Take the axe company Gränsfors Bruk, they specialize in making axes, traditional axes, no plastics, just iron and wood for different specialized uses, it's not "innovative" it's traditional and it's not "EXPANSIVE" and "GROUND BREAKING" it's just good craftsmanship and love of the craft - that's whats important, seems more like a motivational speech for get rich fast Silicon Valley types.

8:24 autopilot spotted 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Edison failed hundreds of times before finally making the light bulb, when asked about his failures, he said "I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.".

@@hyteck Didn't Edison steal ideas though?

not really. he has done what people like elon musk do: hire people to do work and then take credit. he claim an invention from Mr.Tesla, but that’s really the only one (to my knowledge)

An important point, this.

the innovators aren't always the best when it comes down to the weeds of calculations and tinkering.

Their favourite emotion is baseless fear.

@@psalm2764 fear makes people pliable to those offering percieved safety.

@Dawson Davis You presume a whole lot. I have a question for you what is a woman?

@@centurionguards3819 i love this, you being a matt walsh guy who is very clearly working in a way to regress our society and the thinking that you are somehow not in this “majority” when trans people are clearly the ones in the outside the box minority

I swearrr..😅😅😅

Then you should listen more to Dutch people

He sounds a lot like a dutch colleague I had. I'm guessing dutch 👍

@Martin Gerlach The origin of the word Dutch comes from the word diut, the name of the language spoken in the Netherlands and West Germany before the Middle Ages , so the people spoke diuts. Later on the word evolved to Dutch for the language of the people from the Netherlands and Deutsch for the people of Germany. That’s how the English speak English, the French speak French and in de Netherlands we don’t speak Netherlandish, but Dutch and the Germans speak Deutsch and not Germanish. It was used to name the language of the people (peasants) to differentiate from the official language of the rulers, French or Latin. After the separation of the southern part of the republic in a Belxit, they became Belgium which is way more French oriented nowadays that the Netherlands, where French has no status and in Belgium it is one of the official languages next to Flemish and German. The different people of Belgium don’t even understand each other and refuse to give in and speak the same language in a conversation. It’s ridiculous, but also the perfect location of the European Parliament, where nobody understands each other but cultivate the illusion of a union. It’s no coincidence the EU parliament looks like the Biblical tower of Babilonia. Genesis 11-9 clearly speaks of the Babylonian confusion of speech, which was a punishment for being to proud and thinking they knew better than god. This hubris let to their downfall, the same as the EU and Belgium. A funny fact is that people from the Netherlands can easily understand about 80% of spoken Deutsch (German) but the other way around proves way more difficult (10-20%). In the Netherlands we speak English with ease but we hardly understand the Wallon French from Belgium due to the very strange pronunciation. Even the French have a hard time with it. The Belgian Wallons actually don’t even like the French. And the Dutch. And the Flemish. And the Germans too actually, something about WW2.. Well, I leave it here. De mazzel (That’s the Dutch version of mazzeltov, from the Jews we welcomed in Amsterdam after they were kicked out of Portugal.)

@Martin Gerlach Servus Martin. Können Sie mir Bescheid geben ob es tatsächlich so ist, das gesprochen Holländisch meistens für Deutscher nicht so einfach zu folgen ist? Ich habe manchmal gehört, dass es Deutscher so vorkommt, als ob wir all unsere Wörter zusammen schmieden. Dadurch scheinen die unterschiedlichen Wörter kaum noch zu erkennen zu sein.

Tell me more please?

If you don't tell him, he's going to call you a know it all

For example, if you would have a TEDx talk, but removed all the content, you might have a talk titled "Why the majority is always wrong"

Jumbozo FOR EXAMPLE, thats was the only way he drew it in fuh

Carol Cyr That’s because you didn’t really listen or you didn’t really understand. The answer to his question on how to be successful was simple, think outside the box. Where the talk had value was he explained how. On top of that he proved his claim about the majority with a very insightful and valid point.

for 97% this talk has been content-free xD

Fun. You only remember the beginning and ending of presentations/conversations. By the time the presentation has come to an end, you forgot 99% of what has been said. It doesn't really matter what he says, did you enjoy and understand his message?

Yes!!

Demian Haki This is a well thought out statement. When you think about the numbers, does it seem that you'd actually need the majority to keep the ship running with the possibility of the 3% making a horrible mistake? if it was 50/50 the mistakes could occur on a much larger scale. That being said well thought out idea's have a less chance of going that far but it doesn't get rid of the possibility.

Demian, great post.

Agree totally regarding the first part regarding fear. The second part is questionable, who says that so many players have to play the game. We could build a society with many more games and in each game fewer players or rotate the innovators or even play games with fewer rules. However, many people barely understand the rules and therefore would have trouble inventing new ones. I would say we have to remember that many people fear change (as Demian mentioned) and at the same time that many people would make a mess if they tried, in other words, their is justified.

Ano Nymous I agree with greed and perhaps a jealous competitive obsession won't let the 3% allow any one else to be in the group for fear of losing their extraordinary share of resources they once used to innovate but no only hoard to stifle any competition to their success, even at the cost of being stuck with an inferior end result. If I ever make it to the 3% I won't step on others who happen to have a similar goal, if they are better then the current solution then being replaced might be inevitable and rather than feared should be embraced.

Demian Haki Very well said.

Ola Ruud it calculated risk but risk nonetheless people usually profit off of people failure or inability to do something anyway

Well obviously. Life is nothing but a grand table of eternal gamble after all.

if you try, there is at least a chance of success.

@@adarshpayyavula6071 chance of success is no match to loss of time, which is finite forever, at least for us, at least for now.

absolutely right the speaker didn't fully consider this...

Die Räuber

good, now reject faith and support us

that was actually a very creative application of being a part of the minority haha

correction being a dislike now is among the approximately 7%

Archibald Belanus Depends. that way you, at some level, told other people that this video is not good ~ not worth the time watching it. That way you probably eliminated some possible future rivals

+Big Foot thats clever

You haven't noticed you haven't been sick the whole time, though, huh?

He didn't mention covid

@@ericfair-layman2429 it was a joke about Google's heavy-handed response to ANY disagreement with the majority opinions on covid. If you ask ANY questions you are automatically a conspiracy theorist/anti-vaxxers.

@@OmegaTou And what valid questions have people been asking, pray tell?

We still haven't come to terms that the vaccines are no solutions and sooner or later we will have to learn to live with the virus, because this virus is not going anywhere and is going to outlive any species of mammals on this Earth. It will take a couple more months before people start realizing they do not want to be jabbed 3 times a year, they do not want immunity as a service ... and the they already have a tool to tackle this coronavirus as they tackle 200 other respiratory pathogens, including some coronaviruses. It is their immune system.

:) That's the point, we have to found it by yourselfs by thinking outside the box; otherwise if it would be handed to us on a silver platter we we'll be still on the automated pilot who just has received another instruction.

Yes, it did. The majority produces norms. Norms don't always solve problems. Innovation doesn't come from thinking in norms. It comes from thinking outside norms.

gregory brian it didn’t. Being wrong or right has very little to do with whether something is innovative or not.

Thank you, I'm was not alone then to wonder how mass intelligence could be disproved!

Oliver Hoffmann - The majority is always wrong when it comes to achieving extraordinary results because the majority is never extraordinary; the majority is, by definition, ordinary. The title fails to specify a particular thing that the majority is always wrong about (literally meaning the majority is wrong about everything), but that particular thing, achieving extraordinary results, is identified in the video.

I have to disagree.. change comes from a person who thinks (out of the box) and put his thoughts into action,the majority as mentioned is “not really thinking” (or thinking inside the box) just on auto pilot mode. I can’t agree with thinking out of the box is a complex combination cause some crazy ideas have came out of people who isn’t really knowledgeable,nor have tons of experienced and various life conditions..and they belong to the 3%.

@@kerbull708 As a historian myself too, i bet you are not historian neither scientist.

As a fellow historian i couldn't agree more! Well said!

I’m sure you’re a historian cause your effort to assume the present is pretty inaccurate..btw,I wrote my opinion about the topic not about the person/user who commented nor their background or anything personal. I wish not all historian is as closed minded as you.

​@@kerbull708 I know that you just wrote an opinion. And from my expierience, your answer to me, actually proved me right on beting that your opinion is based on ignorance in that perpective.

what i understood from the lecture is 'be the best version of yourself'. Make some effort -of course always being yourself.

Michael Beach be there or be square!

Yes. He does doesn't he? I wonder how he would define "High Achievement"? He did mention Morality...just once I think. (Right after he first drew the box) But the other three sides (actually the "box" is really, as depicted, a squarish shape.) I wonder if he has forgotten how valuable the "Majority 97%" is to the "3%", the "2%" and the "1%"? (Though the "1%" may have won "independence" from the "97%". (They are self perpetuating in their own "world"?)

Daniel, not valuable to us at all, and indeed, quite detrimental.

@@viktorreznov4718 Howdy, Kade. It looks like you are saying that the 97% is NOT valuable to us at all. Am I reading your answer correctly? And then you continue with "indeed quite detrimental." I need to ask you a few questions if I may: When you write "us", do you meant part or all, of the "3%", "2%" and "1%" ? If "part", which part please? The "3%", "2%", or "1%"? If your reply is to the affirmative for the above, then would you please further share your Ideas about this? I need to better understand your Thoughts and Feelings about this.

If the majority is high achievement then it becomes normative lol

@@mccaboy That is truly philosophical because it will never happen.

That's NOT wisdom, that's compliance to a group. Sheep are NOT wise. I don't even think Aristotle was even THAT foolish to say that...

Yup my thouggt exactly

Ye like all the people saying the vaccine doesnt work like what? it obviously does or like the people who just wont wear a mask because their daddies at fox tells them not to. Like yeah I totaly understand. those sheople at Fox.

@@noahaglund3179 the vaccine doesn't work. I have 2 coworkers that are double vaxxed and they're now out for 2 weeks. Cuz they have covid. I got tested and I'm fine. Everyone else at work is fine. I'm not vaxxed and neither is majority of my coworkers. The Vax isn't isn't Vax. By sheer definition a vaccine is supposed to give you immunity. It doesn't. Thus by definition, it's not a vaccine. In fact if you go look up the patent number for the Vax you'll find out it's not patented under anything biological, it's actually patented as tech. So really let's use our heads here. If it's not a Vax, what is it?

Thought the same

@@noahaglund3179 okay, just dont stop other people from making their own decisions

No it isn't. Every one in that room could be part of the 3%. The 3% is about 240 million people.

Note that he didn't say 'all of you', but 'each of you'.

Maybe instead of "can" he should have said "could".

Eventually they can raise these 3% to something higher

Well. At that time, he is only addressing the people in that room...

This reference is the base of ALOT of gurus and teachings. I believe there lies the secret of happynes

Yes very interesting subject.

Thank you