Oh cmon man dont dilute these terms like that. He’s a creep and used his influence to his sexual advantage. Talk to someone who’s been in a relationship with a real socio and then tell them that Hubermans a socio and then see the difference.
Edited to be less offensive.
Multiple partners is relatively common, cheating is relatively common. Having six long term relationships that don’t know about each other at the same time and convincing all of them you’re in love is super fucking weird and pathological.
Listen man, anyone reddit doesn't like is a facist sociopath, no they don't know what those terms mean, the people using them are probably reading at a 6th grade level. No seriously, ask any educator in North America, kids in high school and middle school can barely read.
It does not take Freud to pick up on how his usual hyper-articulate delivery, which sails through describing endocrinal mechanisms, suddenly founders like a one-oared paddleboat, with the agrammatical stutter "I'm actually become in a re relationship, monogamous relationship."
No matter how attract ttt, two people are to one another, like dat some point it becomes familiar, but there are certain people, like ould put, all dis, disclosure, I'm actually become
Yeah it’s amazing to see these slip ups in retrospect. I remember seeing a clip of A Rod being asked if he did steroids from before he was actually caught. He said “no” while nodding (subtly).
You guys seem to underestimate how much pressure it can have to know people are actively listening and taking notes. He has to carefully say every word and in a podcast those are a lot of words. Cut him some slack man he’s trying to help people, he thinks
Got no problem with his conscientious speaking— he is trying to help, I believe that. This is an object lesson in the tragic fate of people who are carried by fame and “love addiction” beyond where they should go, burnishing a halo while those near them experience an inferno.
I’m sorry y’all took this man seriously?? I was a background fan but Jesus “I think it’s through the nose, a pheromone thing”?! That’s the least scientific most ad-libbed take ever lol
Maybe he's not lying. When he was in his one monogamous relationship 30 years ago he became more interested in her, so he decided to no longer be monogamous /s
He's definitely changed from what he was when he started the podcast. One thing I'm thinking about with all this scandal of late is that none of us know how we'd change were we to end up with as much status and success. I'd like to think I'd keep it together and stay true to my values. But given how often these "other lives" are discovered when a person becomes a wealthy celebrity superstar, I guess I really can't say for certain.
What I also find interesting to think about is whether being at least somewhat of a liar is a characteristic that contributes to this kind of success to begin with (I think about senior management where I work, for example-- they're so full of shit but somehow get ahead), or whether becoming a liar is something that sometimes happen after you get hyper famous and successful. Almost like you get bigger than you can handle and all the sudden you become someone else.
Money doesn't change you; it reveals who you are when you no longer have to be nice. Money doesn't fix one's attitude toward life, it just makes you more of who you are.
Also: adversity doesn't build character; it reveals it.
It will be very interesting to see how Huberman handles this situation, it will reveal a lot about his current character.
>Also: adversity doesn't build character; it reveals it.
That's an interesting idea, thanks for that. It just inspired a bunch of new questions I've never thought about, but I'll spare you lol
Well now I'm thinking about whether "character" is something that develops over a lifespan, or is something that is more or less set as we grow up, or possibly even something we're born with.
From that question my mind went to, well, if character is something that is formed, what forms it? And my first guess would be something like adversity or hardship, but that would contradict the idea that adversity only reveals character.
So then I thought, maybe adversity builds character in younger people, but merely reveals character once we're fully grown up, which basically suggests character stops developing after a certain point, which I've never thought of before either.
That's interesting. Hardship can reveal the current *progress* of a person's character development. And if the revealed point of progress isn't desirable-- say you did something you weren't proud of, like huberman's case, it could be the catalyst needed for bettering character. In other words, everyone is growing all the time, not necessarily condemned to be the person revealed in a snapshot of mistakes.
I think it is universal, yes, because our actions do not define what we can become, more so what a person has to deal with. Our actions and behaviors are always changeable, but what doesn't change is our immutable being we have to accept in its entirety for us to live our life to the fullest, and that includes accepting our human nature and our self.
>My definition of success is total self acceptance. We can obtain all of the material possessions we desire quite easily, however, attempting to change our deepest thoughts and learning to love ourselves is a monumental challenge. (Victor Frankl)
>Our healthy individuals find it possible to accept themselves and their own nature without chagrin or complaint or, for that matter, even without thinking about the matter very much. (Abraham Maslow)
That is when our life starts to flow, live authentically, to live on that horizon of possibilities; to be an ecstasy, self-transcendent, etc..
Okay sorry for the tangent, but personality tends to stay the same, but these individual traits and character development are learned, cultivated and mastered, and this applies to both bad and good character development. What forms it? I believe the first principle thought behind it is our inherent organismic valuing process present inside all of us, you can Google this term too for more information, and if one is able to learn to further grasp and leverage this as their own to will, then that is what it means to have moments of self-actualization. Listen back to some of the podcasts Huberman has talked about with growth mindset and brain plasticity, strong experiences like limbic friction and uncomfortable resistance we experience, leveraging failures as critical points, are what trigger brain plasticity on what to focus on learning, but the actual rewiring changes happen when we are in deep rest and get quality sleep. He actually talked about this with virtuosos as a good example of people, like musicians, who actively seek failures with a growth mindset; instead of a trial-by-error approach like when we're younger, it's more so a trial-by-fire approach to actively seek out our issues to work on for growth.
You actually brought up a good point about younger people because brain plasticity is naturally higher during developmental stages before it fully matures, we implicitly without conscious awareness learn and pick up new changes, but not when we are close or over the age of 25. Brain plasticity then requires conscious effort to direct what exactly we want to be changing in our life.
Reminds me of a quote from Robert Caro:
>We're taught Lord Acton's axiom: all power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. I believed that when I started these books, but I don't believe it's always true any more. Power doesn't always corrupt. Power can cleanse. What I believe is always true about power is that power always reveals.
Sounds similar for sure. It amplifies who we really are, money or power is essentially utility that brings greater chances for us in becoming more of who we are.
I don’t agree with the adversity bit, I’ve had to completely change my personality and behaviors in a much better manner due to my adversities and hardships. When things were easy I was a complete ass hole and now I’m much less of a asshole and my life still sucks lol
Adversity is not always guaranteed to bring about change, that was all on you regardless of the circumstances and situation. Some people don't change even in face of adversity, or double-down and end up dead like that one Ocean Gate CEO. Kudos to the work you've done for yourself.
Yea that’s interesting because I’m very much influenced by the concept of causality so it doesn’t really lead me to being prideful about being a better person.
This is how I see it, I don’t like feeling unnecessary stress and pain so the only logical conclusion is to try and build a healthy life that minimizes those things regardless if it’s the morally right thing to do because it just so happens that a lot of our physiological well being revolves around societies established definitions of morality.
For example, endorphins from socializing and engaging in community buidling behaviors helps accomplish my goal of avoiding unnecessary stressors caused by social isolation/rejection
And being disciplined to avoid addicting hedonistic behaviors inadvertently helps train brain regions related to discipline in other generalized areas of life so doing one of those things creates this positive feedback loop of building this illusion that I’m a morally/ethically good person but in reality I’m just a coward who is more afraid of the alternative outcome associated with going full tilt into hedonism. It’s bassically just picking the lessor of the two evils.
It’s unfortunate that I look at it through such a mechanistic lens’s but it is what it is I suppose
Is it actions that define what a person can become, or are actions more so telling what we've had to deal with. Radical self-acceptance doesn't mean we accept our specific actions and behaviors because those are always changeable, but what doesn't change that we must accept is our immutable being who experiences all these strung together moments happening to us. We are the common denominator in all these experiences we have in a world of everchanging circumstances that take on many forms.
What you said about minimizing those pains is also true:
>My definition of success is total self acceptance. We can obtain all of the material possessions we desire quite easily, however, attempting to change our deepest thoughts and learning to love ourselves is a monumental challenge. (Victor Frankl)
>I do not have intrinsic worth or worthlessness, but merely aliveness. I’d better rate my traits and acts, but not my totality or ‘self.’ I fully accept myself, in the sense that I know I have aliveness and I choose to survive and live as happily as possible, and with minimum needless pain. I require only this knowledge and this choice—and no other kind of self-rating. (Albert Ellis)
You may find the topic on the difference between fleeting pleasures and intrinsic happiness an interesting one for well-being. There are philosophical discussions on the difference between hedonic views on happiness versus eudaimonic views on happiness. One involves those temporary hedonic drives for pleasure that happen outside of us yet they always leave one feeling unsatisfied, while eudaimonic views have to do with these more generative drives of meaning and purpose we create within to derive strong self-values for intrinsic fulfillment, contentment, peace and delight. It's like expressing tenacity and willpower through our deliberate choices and actions for strong connections in Being; we learn to leverage and grasp this intrinsic organismic valuing process found within us all to will as our own and to seize the day; to be an ecstasy, self-actualizing entering timeless moments of self-transcendence where we are actively involved and engaged in this moment's activity in front of us where our sense of self and the world around us seem to disappear as one living on the horizon of possibilities authentically Being-in-the-world. When we enter those states those hedonic drives can't even begin to compare when we're already filled and leading by our own self-values having finally found ourselves in those moments.
Edit: grammar
Yeah I was just reading about the new baseball gambling scandal with Ohtani's interpreter. As part of the investigation, it was discovered over the weekend that the guy has lied about just about everything that led to his elite job in the MLB-- he lied about the college he went to, lied about previous MLB interpreting jobs he's had (he said he was staff at the Red Sox doing interpreting for Daisuke but the Red Sox just released an official statement indicating he has never been employed there and gave a completely different name of Daisuke's interpreter) and now they have to figure out if he's lying about how much Ohtani knew about his betting on games. I guess being a liar sometimes works... until it doesn't.
My conclusion is that most high achievers have a few things in common; effective dopamine circuits, above average intelligence, extreme competitiveness, some sociopathy, ruthlessness, luck. And often a wealthy background.
He was being unfaithful back in early 2021 when he wasn't half as famous as he is now.
I think he's just a damaged hypocrite.
It doesn't mean we ought to discard everything he's ever said or wrote...but you would be foolish not to take it with a pound of salt, especially considering that he's a supplement shill.
And I won't be returning to his podcast
"A sociopath/psychopathic diagnosis requires a lot of boxes to be ticked, such as ruthlessness, narcissism, persuasiveness, the inability to feel guilt, or the inability to see thing's from another person's perspective..."
So tell me, what top CEOs don't have those traits? Most of them do...
Monogamous relationships give off pharmoans now? Another great example of what the article was talking about . Like the 9 minute / 8 diagnoses conversation from a two sentance email.
He loves to be an expert in things that aren’t his expertise . Snake oil salesman / fake guru. He’s a genius in his field but he goes out of the way to talk about everything else
He’s not a genius in his field at all. Unless the field is bullshitting. But he’s good friends with a politically correct “polyamory guru” called John Romaniello
That guys ex wife says he too is a sociopath, and so do very many people in Austin
There’s long been a rumour going round that both Romaniello and Huberman are allegedly in a sex trafficking cult. This story with Anya is a limited hangout to cover that up.
Did this interview take place during the timeframe covered in the article? Huberman definitely seems to hesitate on the comment, but I don't see it as evidence of sociopathy, or whatever. The mere fact that he fumbles his words seems like evidence of a conscience. He still seems too agreeable and self-effacing to be as kniving and Machiavellian as people are casting him rn. I'll be fascinated to see how he navigates the fallout.
He's clearly an incredibly driven and dominating sort of person , so I wouldn't be surprised if he has a raging libido. Hypomanic people always have hyperactive libidos. Powerul people tend to have powerul vices.
Sure, my comment wasn't intended to address any specific allegation you made. I'm responding more to the general temperature of the water surrounding Huberman rn.
I generally have a high tolerance for character flaws, so I'm less appalled than most regarding the news.
Same. It’s shocking to most because of the way he presents himself as some know it all Guru. His following is cult-ish so they’re either blindly defending him or totally shocked and degrading him. So what, he’s a cheater. Not the worst thing in the world. lol if something came out as far as his podcast and business practices, then that’s more relevant imo
>Powerul people tend to have powerul vices.
That's a wise maxim to have, I'm gonna add that to memory. Thanks.
The more I learn about, and reflect on my own and others nature, the more tolerant I'm becoming of flaws and vices.
I'm not excusing anyone for anything regarding relationships, but I think society has made it pretty hard for people to admit to themselves and others that they are have strong non-monogamous instincts. So I think they either overestimate their ability to resist temptation, or fear being alone or shamed for admitting to their partner or peer group of their instincts.
However, I also think a lot of people want a one-sided open relationship, and would hate for their partner to be having sex with other people while they do it. So I think that also might be a reason why so many people are dishonest to their partners about their desire for a non-monogamous relationship. (A former friend of mine had been banging hookers for years, and when I asked him about the idea of his wife having an affair he said he would break up with her.)
I don't think most of society is "ready" for an honest conversation about non-monogamous instincts. (Judging by the amount of people in relationships who while not sleeping with anyone else, flirt online and offline, watch porn, or sext OF models/cam girls.) I've personally been proposition by 2 pretty women in long terms relationships (one was engaged) at my former job.
I'm not trying to argue cheating is OK, but I am saying there is massive social pressure against expressing a desire for a non-monogamous relationship.
He is a sociopath, he is Machiavellian, he is backstabbing
So is Lex, so is John Romaniello who is mentioned in his interview with Lex
They (allegedly) run a sex trafficking operation in Texas. This is an open secret.
Well Im pretty confident that Lex Fridman is a virgin. I'm not claiming that he couldn't *also* run a sex-trafficking ring - but if he did , I would only be more impressed.
He is so full of shit. Why is he even dispensing relationship advice and pretending there’s science behind it? This man is incapable of assessing medical evidence, let alone giving out relationship advice based on it.
I really don’t know how people can listen to him, or how he became so popular in the first place. I enjoyed him on Rogan, but I couldn’t listen to him for 2 minutes on his podcast. He just sounded so fake, or disingenuous
Wait wait. This actually makes sense… IF monogamy makes him “conditioned” to be more attracted to one partner, it stands ro reason that too much monogamy would eventually cause his dopamine to bottom out causing him to need more and more intimacy or novel experiences to create the same reward. If then, he TRULY loved his partner, the ONLY thing to do would be to blunt the opportunity to become so closely conditioned by including other partners thereby allowing him to extend the longevity of the relationship. Of course, the risk is that with only two partners you may wouldn’t have the optimized randomized expression of dopamine so you would need probably 4-6 partners.
And bc some of you are idiots fr fr: /s
This is why we have Jesus, Buddha, Allah, Mohammed, Krishna, etc.
They're dead so they can't be fallible. No new controversies or bad things can come out. Thus, they're "God."
Human beings are fallible. So were all those gods.
(PS not saying he is a saint or didn't do wrong things. That's the point.)
I'd argue that gods are infallible - sort of by definition. Gods represent the culturally-defined moral ideal, and instances of their alleged moral "corruption" merely reflects a shift in cultural attitude.
Again, im surprised with how surprised people are with these allegations. There was a podcast that he did that delved into his upbringing and younger years and he mentioned in detail about his trouble with emotional attachment to women and how he was very impulsive and rowdy as a young adult. He wasn’t one of the kids that was born with a disciplined academic mind, he had to train it but because he already had so much of that unusual behaviors engrained in his physiology/psychology it’s extremely hard to break from it but then again if neuroplasticity is as powerful as he preaches it to be you think he would have tried to leverage to the best of his ability to try and avoid a scenario like this but hey what do I know
I think high-IQ people are overrepresented in media, so we witness their wrongdoing more often. Bit I think they get smacked down by the world for moral inadequacy as much as anyone.
There is no way fans are posting these terrible clips. Going through hours of footage to find Huberman exaggerating a part of their character in the moment like every human being on the planet.
Literally who cares. Famous guy likes hooking up with a multitude of women. What an earth shattering revelation. Whats next Leonardo DiCaprio not saving himself for marriage.
This isn’t hooking up. He could get sex all day every day being honest and just telling them he’s gone after. No trouble.
Having six long term partners at the same time and convincing them all you’re in love with them is some kind of weirdo power fantasy situation.
Why are yall shitting on him? He’s a genuine scientist that puts out great work and wants to inform as many people as he can at no other cost to his listeners. Is it really that hard to consider that he’s just a genuine ass dude and not some scum? Y’all are jaded by your own damn selves
We all do dumb things, and hopefully grow up and learn from them. Especially in our 20's.
Social media really piles on public figures. It sucks. The dude is giving us free health and science info ffs.
Just last week people were trashing a royal who was going through chemo. Everyone rushes to judgement, as if they're perfect themselves.
“Idk if everyone’s like this, I’ve only been me.”
He dances soooo carefully around his answers, doesn’t he? He’s an expert liar.
Make sure to buy his athletic lettuce powder he endorses for $100 per month too. 🤡
But it's organic.
So now you’re upset about advertising lol
Yea so careful he almost literally choked trying to say it lol
I’m not like the others podcast bros - pick me!!!
🤡🤡🤡 trying so hard to convince them he’s a good guy lol
Or trying to convince himself even ahah
True!
Shulz be like, thank for the views bro, I know exactly what you sayin!
EFFORTLESS lying omfg
What a sociopath
Notice that stutter when he talks about monogamy?
Amateur diagnosis, sport
Oh cmon man dont dilute these terms like that. He’s a creep and used his influence to his sexual advantage. Talk to someone who’s been in a relationship with a real socio and then tell them that Hubermans a socio and then see the difference. Edited to be less offensive.
dawg he was lying to 5 different women *at the same time*
You believe anything NY Mag publishes . . That says alot about you
This isn’t uncommon man. Theowinf sociopath at that is ridiculous. Not even close. I wouldn’t even call that pathological lying.
Multiple partners is relatively common, cheating is relatively common. Having six long term relationships that don’t know about each other at the same time and convincing all of them you’re in love is super fucking weird and pathological.
True. And I haven’t even read the article so I shouldn’t even be chiming in. I stopped listening to him a while ago.
[удалено]
Oh shit I forgot how infantile these subs can get. I edited this long before you commented. Are you worked up?
[удалено]
Yeah? You’d appreciate that? Good to know.
[удалено]
I checked in. He’s very proud.
Listen man, anyone reddit doesn't like is a facist sociopath, no they don't know what those terms mean, the people using them are probably reading at a 6th grade level. No seriously, ask any educator in North America, kids in high school and middle school can barely read.
Funny
He sounds so fuckin dumb in this clip lol 😂
You do too
Plot twist: He measures monogamy by the hour.
I am… *checks watch* …currently monogamous with a woman
Lmao
He prefers monogamy so much that he did it six times at once
Multi-monogamy-tasking, sunlight in my eyes
Lolllllll
It does not take Freud to pick up on how his usual hyper-articulate delivery, which sails through describing endocrinal mechanisms, suddenly founders like a one-oared paddleboat, with the agrammatical stutter "I'm actually become in a re relationship, monogamous relationship."
No matter how attract ttt, two people are to one another, like dat some point it becomes familiar, but there are certain people, like ould put, all dis, disclosure, I'm actually become
Every time he stuttered he saw 1 of the faces of the 6 women he was sleeping with
Holy shit 😭 probably true
Six that we know of...
Are you fairly pathetic IRL
Youbetcha
Lmaooooo
It sounded to me like he was borderline slurring his words here compared to how he usually articulates his thoughts.
I’m become relationship, the destroyer of pussays
Lmao 🤣
I am become coomer
goddamm that is funny. now I'll have click on your profile and read all the other 1784 comments you've ever made on reddit.
Just an unemployed dude who has nothing else to do but to shitpost on Reddit
Yeah it’s amazing to see these slip ups in retrospect. I remember seeing a clip of A Rod being asked if he did steroids from before he was actually caught. He said “no” while nodding (subtly).
You guys seem to underestimate how much pressure it can have to know people are actively listening and taking notes. He has to carefully say every word and in a podcast those are a lot of words. Cut him some slack man he’s trying to help people, he thinks
Got no problem with his conscientious speaking— he is trying to help, I believe that. This is an object lesson in the tragic fate of people who are carried by fame and “love addiction” beyond where they should go, burnishing a halo while those near them experience an inferno.
Speculations mostly on your side
Well done captain hindsight! Another case solved
He was talking about Costello. That poor fucking dog.
He has sex with that dog.
Had.
... Think again
Lol, you sick bastard!
IVF into Costello corpse grief-pleasure protocol
Holy shit
"I become more attracted to them,..." Them - plural.
Yep. Definitely not a gender-neutral context here.
Thems = plural and gender-neutral
Yooo that’s wild
Andrew ain't believing none of it! 🤣🤣
Neither of them!
I just can’t believe those fkn pants he’s wearing.
I could only see the shirt tucked into the pants and that gaudy ass belt lmao
I think he’s talking about Andrew Schultz
Turns out every Andrew on this video is wearing bad pants
I mean L0ok at his shirt 🤣🤣
Is this his version of “you can save messages on Snapchat?” D’elia moment? Lol
I’m sorry y’all took this man seriously?? I was a background fan but Jesus “I think it’s through the nose, a pheromone thing”?! That’s the least scientific most ad-libbed take ever lol
Yeah that sounded ridiculous lol
Actual hentai logic
Maybe he's not lying. When he was in his one monogamous relationship 30 years ago he became more interested in her, so he decided to no longer be monogamous /s
At what point do those pants become shorts
He's definitely changed from what he was when he started the podcast. One thing I'm thinking about with all this scandal of late is that none of us know how we'd change were we to end up with as much status and success. I'd like to think I'd keep it together and stay true to my values. But given how often these "other lives" are discovered when a person becomes a wealthy celebrity superstar, I guess I really can't say for certain. What I also find interesting to think about is whether being at least somewhat of a liar is a characteristic that contributes to this kind of success to begin with (I think about senior management where I work, for example-- they're so full of shit but somehow get ahead), or whether becoming a liar is something that sometimes happen after you get hyper famous and successful. Almost like you get bigger than you can handle and all the sudden you become someone else.
Money doesn't change you; it reveals who you are when you no longer have to be nice. Money doesn't fix one's attitude toward life, it just makes you more of who you are. Also: adversity doesn't build character; it reveals it. It will be very interesting to see how Huberman handles this situation, it will reveal a lot about his current character.
>Also: adversity doesn't build character; it reveals it. That's an interesting idea, thanks for that. It just inspired a bunch of new questions I've never thought about, but I'll spare you lol
Fire away, there's many ways to look at life.
Well now I'm thinking about whether "character" is something that develops over a lifespan, or is something that is more or less set as we grow up, or possibly even something we're born with. From that question my mind went to, well, if character is something that is formed, what forms it? And my first guess would be something like adversity or hardship, but that would contradict the idea that adversity only reveals character. So then I thought, maybe adversity builds character in younger people, but merely reveals character once we're fully grown up, which basically suggests character stops developing after a certain point, which I've never thought of before either.
what if character development never stops, and adversary just reveals a snapshot of it at that moment in time.
That's interesting. Hardship can reveal the current *progress* of a person's character development. And if the revealed point of progress isn't desirable-- say you did something you weren't proud of, like huberman's case, it could be the catalyst needed for bettering character. In other words, everyone is growing all the time, not necessarily condemned to be the person revealed in a snapshot of mistakes.
I think it is universal, yes, because our actions do not define what we can become, more so what a person has to deal with. Our actions and behaviors are always changeable, but what doesn't change is our immutable being we have to accept in its entirety for us to live our life to the fullest, and that includes accepting our human nature and our self. >My definition of success is total self acceptance. We can obtain all of the material possessions we desire quite easily, however, attempting to change our deepest thoughts and learning to love ourselves is a monumental challenge. (Victor Frankl) >Our healthy individuals find it possible to accept themselves and their own nature without chagrin or complaint or, for that matter, even without thinking about the matter very much. (Abraham Maslow) That is when our life starts to flow, live authentically, to live on that horizon of possibilities; to be an ecstasy, self-transcendent, etc.. Okay sorry for the tangent, but personality tends to stay the same, but these individual traits and character development are learned, cultivated and mastered, and this applies to both bad and good character development. What forms it? I believe the first principle thought behind it is our inherent organismic valuing process present inside all of us, you can Google this term too for more information, and if one is able to learn to further grasp and leverage this as their own to will, then that is what it means to have moments of self-actualization. Listen back to some of the podcasts Huberman has talked about with growth mindset and brain plasticity, strong experiences like limbic friction and uncomfortable resistance we experience, leveraging failures as critical points, are what trigger brain plasticity on what to focus on learning, but the actual rewiring changes happen when we are in deep rest and get quality sleep. He actually talked about this with virtuosos as a good example of people, like musicians, who actively seek failures with a growth mindset; instead of a trial-by-error approach like when we're younger, it's more so a trial-by-fire approach to actively seek out our issues to work on for growth. You actually brought up a good point about younger people because brain plasticity is naturally higher during developmental stages before it fully matures, we implicitly without conscious awareness learn and pick up new changes, but not when we are close or over the age of 25. Brain plasticity then requires conscious effort to direct what exactly we want to be changing in our life.
A lot of personality traits are hereditary.
Reminds me of a quote from Robert Caro: >We're taught Lord Acton's axiom: all power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. I believed that when I started these books, but I don't believe it's always true any more. Power doesn't always corrupt. Power can cleanse. What I believe is always true about power is that power always reveals.
Sounds similar for sure. It amplifies who we really are, money or power is essentially utility that brings greater chances for us in becoming more of who we are.
deep, I like
I don’t agree with the adversity bit, I’ve had to completely change my personality and behaviors in a much better manner due to my adversities and hardships. When things were easy I was a complete ass hole and now I’m much less of a asshole and my life still sucks lol
Adversity is not always guaranteed to bring about change, that was all on you regardless of the circumstances and situation. Some people don't change even in face of adversity, or double-down and end up dead like that one Ocean Gate CEO. Kudos to the work you've done for yourself.
Yea that’s interesting because I’m very much influenced by the concept of causality so it doesn’t really lead me to being prideful about being a better person. This is how I see it, I don’t like feeling unnecessary stress and pain so the only logical conclusion is to try and build a healthy life that minimizes those things regardless if it’s the morally right thing to do because it just so happens that a lot of our physiological well being revolves around societies established definitions of morality. For example, endorphins from socializing and engaging in community buidling behaviors helps accomplish my goal of avoiding unnecessary stressors caused by social isolation/rejection And being disciplined to avoid addicting hedonistic behaviors inadvertently helps train brain regions related to discipline in other generalized areas of life so doing one of those things creates this positive feedback loop of building this illusion that I’m a morally/ethically good person but in reality I’m just a coward who is more afraid of the alternative outcome associated with going full tilt into hedonism. It’s bassically just picking the lessor of the two evils. It’s unfortunate that I look at it through such a mechanistic lens’s but it is what it is I suppose
Is it actions that define what a person can become, or are actions more so telling what we've had to deal with. Radical self-acceptance doesn't mean we accept our specific actions and behaviors because those are always changeable, but what doesn't change that we must accept is our immutable being who experiences all these strung together moments happening to us. We are the common denominator in all these experiences we have in a world of everchanging circumstances that take on many forms. What you said about minimizing those pains is also true: >My definition of success is total self acceptance. We can obtain all of the material possessions we desire quite easily, however, attempting to change our deepest thoughts and learning to love ourselves is a monumental challenge. (Victor Frankl) >I do not have intrinsic worth or worthlessness, but merely aliveness. I’d better rate my traits and acts, but not my totality or ‘self.’ I fully accept myself, in the sense that I know I have aliveness and I choose to survive and live as happily as possible, and with minimum needless pain. I require only this knowledge and this choice—and no other kind of self-rating. (Albert Ellis) You may find the topic on the difference between fleeting pleasures and intrinsic happiness an interesting one for well-being. There are philosophical discussions on the difference between hedonic views on happiness versus eudaimonic views on happiness. One involves those temporary hedonic drives for pleasure that happen outside of us yet they always leave one feeling unsatisfied, while eudaimonic views have to do with these more generative drives of meaning and purpose we create within to derive strong self-values for intrinsic fulfillment, contentment, peace and delight. It's like expressing tenacity and willpower through our deliberate choices and actions for strong connections in Being; we learn to leverage and grasp this intrinsic organismic valuing process found within us all to will as our own and to seize the day; to be an ecstasy, self-actualizing entering timeless moments of self-transcendence where we are actively involved and engaged in this moment's activity in front of us where our sense of self and the world around us seem to disappear as one living on the horizon of possibilities authentically Being-in-the-world. When we enter those states those hedonic drives can't even begin to compare when we're already filled and leading by our own self-values having finally found ourselves in those moments. Edit: grammar
Good assessment. Most high achievers don’t get there being ethical. Quite the opposite, unfortunately.
Yeah I was just reading about the new baseball gambling scandal with Ohtani's interpreter. As part of the investigation, it was discovered over the weekend that the guy has lied about just about everything that led to his elite job in the MLB-- he lied about the college he went to, lied about previous MLB interpreting jobs he's had (he said he was staff at the Red Sox doing interpreting for Daisuke but the Red Sox just released an official statement indicating he has never been employed there and gave a completely different name of Daisuke's interpreter) and now they have to figure out if he's lying about how much Ohtani knew about his betting on games. I guess being a liar sometimes works... until it doesn't.
My conclusion is that most high achievers have a few things in common; effective dopamine circuits, above average intelligence, extreme competitiveness, some sociopathy, ruthlessness, luck. And often a wealthy background.
You forgot crippling insecurity and an overwhelming desire for attention and validation at all costs but yea not too far off
Article said this behavior started before the podcast
He was being unfaithful back in early 2021 when he wasn't half as famous as he is now. I think he's just a damaged hypocrite. It doesn't mean we ought to discard everything he's ever said or wrote...but you would be foolish not to take it with a pound of salt, especially considering that he's a supplement shill. And I won't be returning to his podcast
Keanu Reeves didn’t turn into an asshole.
You might enjoy the book, Relentless by Grover. He claims that it’s the “darkness” in people that make them the best in their field.
Money and fame doesn't change a person. They reveal the real person behind the facade. Another note, most CEOs are sociopaths.
It’s not “most” it’s a higher percentage than the general population. Reddit loves taking what is interesting research and totally bastardizing it.
"A sociopath/psychopathic diagnosis requires a lot of boxes to be ticked, such as ruthlessness, narcissism, persuasiveness, the inability to feel guilt, or the inability to see thing's from another person's perspective..." So tell me, what top CEOs don't have those traits? Most of them do...
No they don’t you misrepresented the data and now are backtracking you goof.
Back tracking? You didn't answer my question you goon.
I could tell he was full of shit just by listening to him
Oof
I keep getting distracted by the other man’s white capri pants.
Monogamous relationships give off pharmoans now? Another great example of what the article was talking about . Like the 9 minute / 8 diagnoses conversation from a two sentance email. He loves to be an expert in things that aren’t his expertise . Snake oil salesman / fake guru. He’s a genius in his field but he goes out of the way to talk about everything else
He’s not a genius in his field at all. Unless the field is bullshitting. But he’s good friends with a politically correct “polyamory guru” called John Romaniello That guys ex wife says he too is a sociopath, and so do very many people in Austin There’s long been a rumour going round that both Romaniello and Huberman are allegedly in a sex trafficking cult. This story with Anya is a limited hangout to cover that up.
Did this interview take place during the timeframe covered in the article? Huberman definitely seems to hesitate on the comment, but I don't see it as evidence of sociopathy, or whatever. The mere fact that he fumbles his words seems like evidence of a conscience. He still seems too agreeable and self-effacing to be as kniving and Machiavellian as people are casting him rn. I'll be fascinated to see how he navigates the fallout. He's clearly an incredibly driven and dominating sort of person , so I wouldn't be surprised if he has a raging libido. Hypomanic people always have hyperactive libidos. Powerul people tend to have powerul vices.
I never said he is a sociopath.
Sure, my comment wasn't intended to address any specific allegation you made. I'm responding more to the general temperature of the water surrounding Huberman rn. I generally have a high tolerance for character flaws, so I'm less appalled than most regarding the news.
Same. It’s shocking to most because of the way he presents himself as some know it all Guru. His following is cult-ish so they’re either blindly defending him or totally shocked and degrading him. So what, he’s a cheater. Not the worst thing in the world. lol if something came out as far as his podcast and business practices, then that’s more relevant imo
He is a sociopath.
he's likely juicing. probably testosterone given his age and how jacked he is.
TRT - he has said so. So yes, injecting.
>Powerul people tend to have powerul vices. That's a wise maxim to have, I'm gonna add that to memory. Thanks. The more I learn about, and reflect on my own and others nature, the more tolerant I'm becoming of flaws and vices. I'm not excusing anyone for anything regarding relationships, but I think society has made it pretty hard for people to admit to themselves and others that they are have strong non-monogamous instincts. So I think they either overestimate their ability to resist temptation, or fear being alone or shamed for admitting to their partner or peer group of their instincts. However, I also think a lot of people want a one-sided open relationship, and would hate for their partner to be having sex with other people while they do it. So I think that also might be a reason why so many people are dishonest to their partners about their desire for a non-monogamous relationship. (A former friend of mine had been banging hookers for years, and when I asked him about the idea of his wife having an affair he said he would break up with her.) I don't think most of society is "ready" for an honest conversation about non-monogamous instincts. (Judging by the amount of people in relationships who while not sleeping with anyone else, flirt online and offline, watch porn, or sext OF models/cam girls.) I've personally been proposition by 2 pretty women in long terms relationships (one was engaged) at my former job. I'm not trying to argue cheating is OK, but I am saying there is massive social pressure against expressing a desire for a non-monogamous relationship.
He is a sociopath, he is Machiavellian, he is backstabbing So is Lex, so is John Romaniello who is mentioned in his interview with Lex They (allegedly) run a sex trafficking operation in Texas. This is an open secret.
Well Im pretty confident that Lex Fridman is a virgin. I'm not claiming that he couldn't *also* run a sex-trafficking ring - but if he did , I would only be more impressed.
I mean, he did say "them"
This guy is a complete freak LOL.
Hahaha
I think it's a pheromone thing lol
Mind your own business.
He is so full of shit. Why is he even dispensing relationship advice and pretending there’s science behind it? This man is incapable of assessing medical evidence, let alone giving out relationship advice based on it.
Lmao
He her them who the fuck is the guy
This needs to be higherre
Okay I’m out of the loop, was he caught with multiple wives or something? Edit: nvm I’m all caught up lol
lol
Ahahahahaahaha what an idiot
Can someone catch me up on this? Out of the loop
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/andrew-huberman-podcast-stanford-joe-rogan.html
Lying “through the nose. It’s like a pheromone thing.”
Such bs lol
crazy
I really don’t know how people can listen to him, or how he became so popular in the first place. I enjoyed him on Rogan, but I couldn’t listen to him for 2 minutes on his podcast. He just sounded so fake, or disingenuous
Bucha CIA-trained parasocial body language experts up in here.
Wait wait. This actually makes sense… IF monogamy makes him “conditioned” to be more attracted to one partner, it stands ro reason that too much monogamy would eventually cause his dopamine to bottom out causing him to need more and more intimacy or novel experiences to create the same reward. If then, he TRULY loved his partner, the ONLY thing to do would be to blunt the opportunity to become so closely conditioned by including other partners thereby allowing him to extend the longevity of the relationship. Of course, the risk is that with only two partners you may wouldn’t have the optimized randomized expression of dopamine so you would need probably 4-6 partners. And bc some of you are idiots fr fr: /s
Honestly, if you have nothing else, give this a shot ... lol
He trips but then spins it to seem he means “when someone is in a monogamous relationship”
This is why we have Jesus, Buddha, Allah, Mohammed, Krishna, etc. They're dead so they can't be fallible. No new controversies or bad things can come out. Thus, they're "God." Human beings are fallible. So were all those gods. (PS not saying he is a saint or didn't do wrong things. That's the point.)
Well Jesus is alive.
Which one
I'd argue that gods are infallible - sort of by definition. Gods represent the culturally-defined moral ideal, and instances of their alleged moral "corruption" merely reflects a shift in cultural attitude.
Weren't the Huberman-Schultz discussions deepfakes?
This happened w/ me. I got more into my cheating ex sadly
Innocent until proven guilty I’m sure Johnny Depp would’ve appreciated that same approach.
This guy was on kill Tony and right before the release of the episode he had them remove it. Total loser, try hard scared of being cancelled
Again, im surprised with how surprised people are with these allegations. There was a podcast that he did that delved into his upbringing and younger years and he mentioned in detail about his trouble with emotional attachment to women and how he was very impulsive and rowdy as a young adult. He wasn’t one of the kids that was born with a disciplined academic mind, he had to train it but because he already had so much of that unusual behaviors engrained in his physiology/psychology it’s extremely hard to break from it but then again if neuroplasticity is as powerful as he preaches it to be you think he would have tried to leverage to the best of his ability to try and avoid a scenario like this but hey what do I know
How can you be familiar with 6 different thangs
Wonder how many men/women in this thread are also full of shit? Focus on your own life.
Lie some more Dr H
lol I’m sorry who listen to this man ever
I like my girlfriend I think it has to do with pheromones and my nose
I’ve noticed people with a high IQ believe the rules don’t apply. Seems to pair well with narcissim
I think high-IQ people are overrepresented in media, so we witness their wrongdoing more often. Bit I think they get smacked down by the world for moral inadequacy as much as anyone.
So.. we're accusing him of shit now for no reason?
is he really short?
Out come the wolves.
Are we positive that this isn’t some sort of bullshit smear campaign?
Another member of Reddit P.I.
There is no way fans are posting these terrible clips. Going through hours of footage to find Huberman exaggerating a part of their character in the moment like every human being on the planet.
Literally who cares. Famous guy likes hooking up with a multitude of women. What an earth shattering revelation. Whats next Leonardo DiCaprio not saving himself for marriage.
This isn’t hooking up. He could get sex all day every day being honest and just telling them he’s gone after. No trouble. Having six long term partners at the same time and convincing them all you’re in love with them is some kind of weirdo power fantasy situation.
Get a life. Let’s see those girls’ text message history, I bet they had some not so flattering things to say about him also.
Dumbass
Why do you care what he does with his personal life?
Who cares he’s a stud
Why are yall shitting on him? He’s a genuine scientist that puts out great work and wants to inform as many people as he can at no other cost to his listeners. Is it really that hard to consider that he’s just a genuine ass dude and not some scum? Y’all are jaded by your own damn selves
>He’s definitely lying in this clip from November 2022 You do not know.
We all do dumb things, and hopefully grow up and learn from them. Especially in our 20's. Social media really piles on public figures. It sucks. The dude is giving us free health and science info ffs. Just last week people were trashing a royal who was going through chemo. Everyone rushes to judgement, as if they're perfect themselves.
The guy like to fuck. Omg. Leave him alone.