There are many pitfalls in a conversation that cause a person to not connect with us.
One of the dangers in conversation is the generalization. Even in my articles I try to use specific examples over generalizations; in conversation it is the same. It seems like I am giving a lot of substance when I make a generalization like:
“I love the outdoors, it makes me feel so free and reminds me how connected I am to nature. I also love plants and finding new kinds I’ve never seen before.”
However, I can create much more impact with specifics.
“Honestly when I go hiking, I am usually the guy holding everyone up because I stopped to check out an amazing flower or plant. I am definitely a plant geek; I get so engrossed and fascinated in nature. Me and a friend hiked Mt Katahdin in Maine; it took us like four hours more than most people (even the out of shape people) to finish because we stopped every two minutes to check out a cool plant or mushroom.”
Which statement could you relate to more? Both have the elements of good relating, the second one though, uses a specific example to relate my story better. When I am relating both to the other person’s statements or being relatable with my own statements, I try to always convey my idea or emotion with a specific example from my life.
People may not have anywhere near the same experience as me, however when I give a specific example, they begin to understand why I actually felt the way that I did, or am the kind of person I am. When they are trying to put themselves in my place to understand me they can do that much easier when I use specifics rather than generalizations.
Tags: Geek
Related Posts
- The Similarity of Attraction
- Breaking up is hard to do
- Stop Calling It A “Set.” Stop Calling Yourself A “PUA.” – By Rob
July 9th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Dan, GREAT distinction between the two. I loved that.
July 9th, 2007 at 9:22 pm
Am I supposed to feel a tingling sensation when I read money articles? Who knows, but I’m feeling the sensations now.
One Love
July 9th, 2007 at 10:12 pm
You explain everything so well Dan. Thank you!
July 10th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
You do an amazing job at break things down. I loved the ebook but the way you explain social dynamics and how people make real connections is on its own level. I do believe charisma arts would benefit from creating a new ebook written by you with all the new insights.
July 11th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
This was great! I really liked the specific examples used. Now I know how to be more relatable. Thanks
July 18th, 2007 at 5:56 am
I agree with Don. You should write a new ebook for charismaarts. Tnx from Sweden
July 20th, 2007 at 7:23 pm
Hey Jack, I respect you immensely, you’re the only one of the MM crew I’ve seen who has made origional DHV stories work, haven’t seen anyone else pull that off.
And the artistry in PUA, is definitely more evident in routines, real conversations can be awful messy!
However the point is Dan does well despite this messiness. Look at some of his bawdy DQs, my dick is tiny, not artful, but FUNNY.
I-perspective is a practical way to keep your mouth moving, that many people can slowly grasp, and visibly see the interest of girls improve. I have. Although it’s not got me much/any success in groups thus far.
DHV stories, at least from Mystery’s videos, are not a practical way of keeping ones mouth moving, for 99% of people who have studied them.
This is not helped by the fact Savoy’s bad advice is making people’s stories sound staged, and so moving them away from getting laid. He even seems to know it in his book ‘these are not good attraction stories’ – NO SHIT!
Besides what is a method that says ‘you’ve got to be a rockstar, or pretend to be, to get laid’? That’s wank. That’s super-AFC.
You are the MM creative super-star. I have no DHVs in my life.
Go away, figure out something new for comfort that doesn’t rely on me/people misrepresenting themselves…. come back, THEN plenty of JMers will be interested.
The loss of MM students to JM is down to:
1. DHVs, not applicable to many people’s lives, guys don’t want to misrepresent their lives.
2. Identity, again people don’t want to misrepresent themselves.
3. The fact neither Mystery nor Savoy provided a routine stack in their books – guys are lazy or uncertain or young.
July 20th, 2007 at 7:28 pm
Good job Dan.
July 22nd, 2007 at 9:57 am
Why would anyone try to copy others DHV stories in the first place? No wonder you hate MM and can’t learn anything from it. You guys look for someone to spoon feed you with words when you need to FOCUS ON LEARNING THE PRINCIPLES. A DHV isn’t a arrogant story. It’s a way to match values though a simple story. Her values. Its amazing how many of you socially isolated retards can’t seem to understand this.
July 22nd, 2007 at 12:36 pm
“Why would anyone try to copy others DHV stories in the first place? No wonder you hate MM and can’t learn anything from it. You guys look for someone to spoon feed you with words when you need to FOCUS ON LEARNING THE PRINCIPLES. A DHV isn’t a arrogant story. It’s a way to match values though a simple story. Her values. Its amazing how many of you socially isolated retards can’t seem to understand this.”
Weird.