Menu

Leonard Mlodinow: “Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior” | Talks at Google

100 Comments



>>commentator: Leonard Mlodinow, bestselling
author of the The Drunkard’s Walk has a new book called SUBLIMINAL: How Your Unconscious
Mind Rules Your Behavior, a fascinating and enlightening look at the profound ways that
the unconscious affects our experiences and our lives. Over the past two decades researchers have
developed remarkable new tools for probing the unconscious or subliminal workings of
the mind and this explosion of research has led to a sea change in our understanding our
how the mind affects the way we live. With a new understanding of our own hidden mental
processes that Mlodinow provides in SUBLIMINAL we are able to recognize and avoid some common
pitfalls in our lives, work, and relationships. So with that, if you could welcome Leonard
Mlodinow to the stage. [applause]>>Leonard: Hi, good afternoon. Thanks for
inviting me here and thanks for taking your lunch hour to listen to me and also to participate
in an experiment and do a little work on your lunch hour. I’m gonna start actually with two experiments
and it’s totally voluntary and it’s anonymous so if you want to participate just do what
I ask and if you don’t then ignore me. So the first thing that I need to do is to
divide you into two groups and it’s important as we do the experiment that no one talk and
you just follow the directions you’ll see on the screen. So to divide you into two groups
let’s go like right down here, and if you perceive that you’re on this side this line
then call yourself Group 1, and if you perceive that you’re on this side then you’re Group
2. And Group 1 please look at the screen, please
read this silently, and record your answer. Okay, now please read this question silently
and also record your answer. Group 1 please turn toward the back of the
room and Group 2 please turn forward. Group 2 please read this question and record
your answer. Alright now please read this question and
record your answer here. Great, now you can all turn forward again.
Thank you. Now if you’re in Group 1 please put a 1 at
the top of your slip of paper and circle it and if you’re in Group 2 put a 2 and circle
that. [pause] Okay, now the second experiment. [pause] I need a female volunteer. Come up, please. [pause] Thank you. What’s your name?>>Maria: Maria.>>Leonard: Sorry.>>Maria: Maria.>>Leonard: Maria, thank you. I’m gonna read,
everyone study these words, okay, I guess hopefully you’ve been studying them. I’m gonna
read the top line, Maria’s gonna read the second line, and then I’ll read the third
line. Candy, sour, sugar, bitter, good.>>Maria: Taste, tooth –>>Leonard: Whoop, whoop sorry. Here come — [pause]>>Maria: Taste –>>Leonard: Whoop, it’s not.>>Maria: Hello.>>Leonard: There we go.>>Maria: Taste, tooth, nice, honey, soda.>>Leonard: Chocolate, heart, cake, eat, pie. Okay, hope you were listening carefully. Thank
you Maria. [pause] Alright now you might be wondering is there
another test coming? Well the answer is yes. But this isn’t it. Whoops, hold on. Don’t
write anything, but I want you just to think of all the words of the list that you can
recall and think of us saying them. Okay, so spend a minute and focus on that. [pause] Alright now – [pause] now comes the test. Either zero, one, two,
or all three of these words were on the list and I want you to think back, picture either
Maria or I saying, or think back in your mind if you can hear either Maria or I saying these
words. If you’re confident that one of these words was on the list write it down; it might
be that none of them were on the list, it might be that all three of them were on the
list, or it might be that one or two of them were on the list. So I’m not tellin’ you which
or how many were on the list, but if any of them, if you have a, if you’re confident that
you have a distinct memory of having seen one of these on the list or heard us saying
them, please write it down right now. Okay. Alright, now Group 1 please pass your papers
this way and Group 2 please pass your papers this way and they’ll be collected and tabulated
for our experiment. Thank you. So while we’re collecting the papers let me
begin the talk. So I call the book SUBLIMINAL: How Your Unconscious
Mind Rules Your Behavior. Why did I call it SUBLIMINAL? Well some of you may know that
in the 1950’s a marketing consultant named James Vickery said that he was able to subliminally
influence people’s behavior by flashing for just one-thirtieth of a second a sign that
says either, “Drink Coca-Cola” or “Eat popcorn,” during a movie called Picnic that was playing
in a New Jersey movie theater. And he claimed that he could increase the sales of popcorn
by I think it was 18% and Coke was 51 or 55% by having these subliminal messages play in
front of the audience which they did not perceive. But about five years later, this is the 50th
anniversary of an article in Advertising Age Magazine in which he admitted that it was
all a hoax; he had a failed marketing business and he was trying to prop it up with this
trick. But although he admitted that it was a hoax it never really left the American consciousness
or our culture and so subliminal persuasion is something that everyone even still recognizes
today. Some people follow this and don’t seem to
have gotten the retraction though, including one of our former Presidents. This was an
ad that George Bush ran against Al Gore in which he flashed, or his campaign, flashed
the word rats in the middle of a message for one-thirtieth of a second and this message
played on TV over an anti-Gore ad and it played for about 4,000 times before somebody discovered
it and then it was pulled from the air. So apparently they didn’t really get the message. But actually a few years after this a scientist
decided to test to see whether such subliminal messages can actually have an effect on people
and they found that even a message such as this or other messages about drinks can have
a little effect, a fragile effect on people in the laboratory. For instance, in one experiment people were
brought into a room and told that they were gonna see word scrambles and unbeknownst to
them one of the quote word scrambles really said Lipton Ice. And afterwards the subjects
were offered drinks and far more than who had seen the Lipton Ice chose Lipton Iced
Tea than those who hadn’t seen it. But nobody really believed you can persuade
someone to like Lipton Iced Tea if you don’t like Lipton Iced Tea or that that effect would
last beyond the laboratory hours later; it’s really something that’s hard to reproduce
in the lab and it’s very fragile but it does exist. One other hand there are many subliminal effects
in your environment that are affecting you all the time that are much less artificial
than this, and that’s really what the book is about. It’s about subliminal effects, meaning
effects that go on below the threshold of consciousness that your brain picks up, that
your senses pick up, that are processed by the unconscious part of your brain and feed
into your consciousness perceptions, visual perceptions, social perceptions, memories,
and they govern the way you behave to a great extent. Let me, before I talk about them specifically,
let me define what I mean by unconscious behavior. An unconscious process in your mind is something
that is automatic and occurs with no effort on your part and it’s outside of your awareness,
you’re not aware that it’s happening or that it’s influencing you, and it’s outside of
your will and largely outside of your control. So those are the traits that I mean when I
say something is unconscious. And as a result of that we often don’t understand
what’s influencing us in our everyday lives [pause] and however I wanna point out that the unconscious
I’m talking about is not the Freudian unconscious that you may have heard a lot of about, it’s
not the unconsciousness that was talked about for most of the 20th century; this is a totally
different kind of unconscious. The Freudian unconscious was very emotional and it was
hidden from people for motivational reasons. But the new unconscious that neuroscientists
and psychologists talk about is far different from that; it’s not accessible through therapy
or talking or introspection, but it takes place in parts of your brain that are inherently
inaccessible to your conscious mind. So even though Freud was right that a lot of your
behavior is influenced by the unconscious, most of the specifics of what he talked about
have not found any support in the scientific community. [pause] My book SUBLIMINAL is based on something called
social neuroscience. And social neuroscience, this slide says it evolved in the mid-1990’s
but actually the technology that largely fueled it evolved in the 1990’s but the subject didn’t
really gel until the early 2000’s; the first meeting in this field was in 2001. The field
is really a ménage a trois, that’s represented by this slide, those three pairs of feet.
And the feet over on this side represent social psychology. Social psychology is a psychology
of how people interact with each other; the psychology of our social interactions. The feet on this side is cognitive psychology.
Cognitive psychology is psychology of the way we think and the way we deliberate. And the feet in the center that brought them
both together is neuroscience, and neuroscience really exploded in the mid-1990’s when something
called functional magnetic resonance imaging became widely available. And before that fields
of psychologies did behavioral studies but it was hard to get a good impression or a
good idea, a concrete idea, of exactly what was going on because we couldn’t see into
people’s heads. And functional magnetic resonance imaging
or FMRI allows scientists in a way to see into people’s heads because it provides a
3-D picture not only of the structure of the brain but of what parts of the brain are currently
active, as you can see here by the yellow and the red areas. And so it allowed scientists
not only to make speculations about behavior being unconscious but to trace what parts
of the brain are responsible for conscious and unconscious behavior and how they interact
with each other. And one of my favorite studies along these
lines, just to show you how powerful it’s becoming, was done by a fellow named Jack
Gallant who is at Berkeley nearby, and he showed people a series of images which are
pictured here, there are many more of them, but here’s four of them. And he used the data
solely from the functional magnetic resonance imaging data to predict what the people were
looking at. So he didn’t use any of the data about what images where actually being shown
but just the readings of these peoples’ brains and he used that to choose images and make
guesses, the computer chose images and made guesses, as to what they were looking at.
The computer had a database of six million images to choose from and after taking these
readings as input it spat out what it thought was its version of mind reading. So let’s see how well it did. [pause] So I think that’s pretty impressive; you can
see on this side, these black slides here, show you the computer’s guess and the red
slides are what the people were actually looking at. [pause] So I’m gonna talk a little bit about how this
works, how the unconscious mind works in your life. First I’m gonna talk about the unconscious
and sensory perception because that’s very easy to illustrate and it’s something that
I can show you visually here as opposed to bringing people up and doing little experiments
on you. But I did do two experiments to start the talk so eventually we’ll go and we’ll
demonstrate how that works in your own lives, but first let’s look at how it works in vision
and hearing and allow the processes that your brains use have their analogs in the way we
construct our world, our social world. I want you to come away with three main points:
one is that our mental processes proceed along two paths, the conscious and the unconscious
which we’re unaware of; secondly that all of our perceptions, our visual perceptions,
our auditory perceptions, our memories, and our social perceptions including the way you
see people and the way you see yourself are not just purely direct reflections of the
data that you take in, but are constructions by your brain that seem real but really are
made of the data that you’ve assimilated plus things like your prior beliefs, your knowledge,
the context, and even your desires. [pause] And I want you to see that the way we experience
the world therefore is largely due to this unconscious processing. [pause] Let’s start with a little picture here, okay.
I want the men especially to look at this picture and to look for something unusual
in this picture, okay? Alright so take your conscious mind, I want you to consciously
search for something unusual in this picture, alright? Okay. Now that picture had something
in the foreground that psychologists would call a high interest image– [laughter] okay, that’s why I said especially the men
in the audience ’cause it’s a higher interest image for men. And how many of you saw something
very unusual in the picture? [pause] So okay a handful. How many of you didn’t? [pause] Okay, slightly larger handful. But normally
it breaks about one to four or one to three; the minority see something unusual and the
majority don’t. And that’s because when light impinges on your retina your brain doesn’t
automatically detect he image and make an image for you but you have something called
attention that has to be directed in order for you to see what your, in order for you
consciously perceive what your eyes are seeing. And this attention is a function of both your
conscious and your unconscious. And in the case of a very high interest image your unconscious
often wins and has that image dominate so that you don’t really see the lower interest
part of the image. In this case I’ll tell you, unfortunately
this is not the best projector, but do you see a King Kong there in the background? If
you look at that screen behind you, as least those of you in the front, it’s a lot clearer
I think. To you right, to the right of the woman as you’re looking at her in the bushes
is the face of King Kong. [pause] Could you see it now? [pause] [people speaking in background] On my screen it’s perfect, but if you look
on that screen back there I think it’s much more, it’s over to the right. I’ll show you
it’s right here. Do you see it now? It can be hard to see even if you’re looking for
it, but right here is a face of King Kong.>>male #1: There’s also a ladder [inaudible]>>Leonard: There’s also a ladder there that’s
in much more contrast, that’s right. Alright let me show you what, when you look,
here’s an example of a scene that you perceive if you look at the road. Now this is the image
that your eye, this is the image that your conscious mind perceives when you look at
the road. Let me show you now the image that your retina picks up. Your retina picks up
an image that’s only clear in the very center of the area that you’re fixating on, and it’s
very fuzzy outside of that and it has a black spot that you’ll see over here which is the
blind spot from where your optic nerve attaches to your retina. What your brain does is it takes this and
it uses this data and it uses the data from both eyes and it fills in the gaps and it
uses the context that you’re looking at and it uses even your expectations and your desires
to present to you a clear image and a three dimensional image which is not really there.
And you perceive the image, when you look down the road, you perceive the image as being
real, you don’t have to expend any effort to see the clear image, it comes automatically
and you can’t in fact if you look at an image of the road you can’t override these unconscious
processes and see it the way it really impinges on your retina because all these things are
happening for you automatically. Nature has created human beings to work this way because
this is how we survived in the wild. If we had to stop and take the actual core data
that’s coming to our eyes and work to reconstruct it we would never be able to catch our prey
or run from our predators. [pause] This is an example of how that works. If you
look at the squares you’ll see the square A and you’ll see the square B. Now the square
that’s labeled B you perceive as a white square and you perceive the square that’s labeled
A as a black square. This is because you’re looking, you know you’re looking at a checkerboard
and you see the shadow from the cylinder and your eye puts all that together. But this
is not the reality; the reality is that the square A is identical to the square B; it’s
not the same color, it’s not any darker or lighter, it’s exactly the same. So I want
you to stare at it and override your unconscious mind and see it as being the same. You see
it as being different because of the context, but actually it’s the same. Now here’s a couple people who are trying
to blot it out with their hands and that’s the right way to do it. But let me do it electronically
for you, it’s a little bit easier. I’m gonna move the checkerboard away from the squares
and once I move the context away you’ll see that the squares are the same color. [pause] There you go. So what your unconscious mind is doing is
it’s creating the reality for you, it’s creating the reality of this checkerboard because it’s
useful for you to see it that way, but it’s overriding the actual physical data that a
physicist would say is impinging on your retinas. [pause] So you recognize this fellow? Your brain has
a very special area called the fusiform face area that’s used to analyze faces. That’s
because human beings are an extremely social species, we’ve evolved to have the most complex
social interactions of any other animal and our brains and our unconscious minds have
also evolved to handle that. So not only does your unconscious handle physical sensory perception
for you it handles a lot of your social perception. So the fusiform face area helps you recognize
people because in human society especially as we were evolving it was very important
to know who’s dominate, who’s not, who’s an ally, who’s an enemy, and how we all relate
to each other. And so we’ve evolved these special talents for the social world and our
unconscious mind builds us a picture of the social world just as it does of the physical
world. The thing about your fusiform face area is though you don’t usually see people
upside down and so it doesn’t really work as well upside down as it does right side
up. So when you look at these pictures they probably both look like they’re pretty decent
pictures of the President. Does any of these looked grotesquely distorted to you?>>male #2: [inaudible] How many of you have seen this before? [laughter] That why I shouldn’t give this talk at Google,
but let’s turn ’em over for you. [pause] So this is the actual pictures and now your
fusiform face area seeing a right side up face kicks in and they look grotesquely distorted,
but it’s hard to see when they’re upside down, you can see the image go away as I turn the
picture. [pause] Here’s another example. Look at the image
on your left: male or female?>>male #3: Female.>>Leonard: Female. And the one on the right?>>male #4: Male.>>Leonard: Male. Okay, but they’re actually
the same person. Not only are they the same person they are the same image except that
one has been doctored to show more contrast and one to have less contrast. So you’re automatically
perceiving the person as a male or a female based on certain cues that you’re used to
from everyday life and this happens unconsciously and outside of your control and it doesn’t
take any effort. [pause] So the moral of all these slides is that our
vision is not objective but rather it’s constructed by our minds employing context, prior knowledge,
belief, desire, and other such factors that are separate from the actual data that comes
into your eyes. The same thing happens in hearing. So I’m
going to just briefly give you a couple examples in hearing and I want you to see how they
are analogous to the same thing that’s happened in vision. [pause] I’m gonna play this sentence for you in a
minute where a cough obliterates one of the sounds. The sentence is, “The state governors
met with their respective legislatures convening in the capital city.” [pause] Now I want you to listen very carefully to
this audio file and just as I showed you the fuzzy picture of the roadside and told you
how your brain fills it in to make it a clear picture, your brain is also gonna fill in
the sound that obliterated by this cough and you’re gonna hear a pretty normal sentence. >>Male Recording: The state governors met
with their respective [cough] legislatures convening in the capital city. The state governors
met with their respective legislatures [cough] convening in the capital city. The state governors
met with their respective [cough] legislatures convening in the capital city. The state governors
met with their respective [cough] legislatures convening in the capital city.>>Leonard: Do you know which sound was obliterated?>>male #5: G.>>Leonard: G. Hum? It’s hard huh? I mean it
sounds as it sounds somewhere like it’s in the word maybe legislatures. Well it is in
the word legislatures and it’s the first, oh, I guess I pushed the button a little too
fast. The answer’s up there. [laughter] Now it’s really astounding that more hands
didn’t go up. [laughs] [laughter] It’s first S in the word legislatures. So
let me play it for you again and try and hear that. >>Male Recording: The state governors met
with the their respective legi [cough]latures convening in the capital city. The state governors
met with their respective legi [cough]latures convening in the capital city. The state governors
met with their respective legi [cough]latures –>>Leonard: So the reason that it’s very hard
or even impossible to tell exactly where that cough comes is that your brain fills it in.
If you didn’t speak English and you heard this you would legis l[cough]atures, legi
[cough]slatures and not the word legislatures ’cause you wouldn’t know to fill it in. But
because that we speak English when you hear this your brain fills it in just like it fills
in the visual data. And there’s a very famous experiment in the
1970’s that shows how far your brain goes and how it uses context to fill it in. They
played a similar audio file with the word “[cough]eel” and the context at the end of
the sentence that the people were listening to as defined, gave their brains the context
for what word was being said. And when they played this for subjects and they didn’t tell
them again what was being obliterated and they asked them what they heard, the subjects
who heard, it was found that the cough “eel” was on the orange reported hearing the sentence,
it was found that the peel was on the orange, and they didn’t even notice that the cough
obliterated the p in peel they just automatically heard peel. When the last word was shoe they
heard heel and so on. So your brain uses the context just like it did in the checkerboard
with the two squares that you thought didn’t match but did, it uses context to create the
reality for you. So speaking of context let me show you how
hard it is to overcome that context. I’m gonna play a song for you, part of a song for you
called Stairway to Heaven by Led Zeppelin. So listen to it. [Led Zeppelin singing “Stairway to Heaven”] [guitar intro] “If there’s a bustle in your hedgerow, don’t
be alarmed now, It’s just a spring clean for the May queen.
Yes, there are two paths you can go by, but in the long run
There’s still time to change the road you’re on.” [guitar fades] Alright now, now that you’ve heard it forwards
I’m gonna play it backwards and I want you to listen to it backwards and see if it makes
any sense. I don’t think the words forward made a lot of sense — [laughter] and I don’t think — [laughter] that’s just me perhaps. And I don’t think
that Led Zeppelin was clever enough to design a song that makes sense both forward and backwards,
but some people claim that it does. I don’t know, how many of you have heard about these
backwards effects? So, alright. So this is something that for a while was quite popular
on the Web looking for messages in backwards songs and speeches by politicians, etcetera. So I’m gonna play this for you, what you just
heard backwards and I want you to listen carefully and see if you can decipher the paragraph
of words that constitute the backwards song. [Led Zeppelin singing “Stairway to Heaven”
played in reverse] [guitar intro] [inaudible] [guitar fades] Alright. Now not those of you who know this
but those of you who don’t know this did you make sense of it? [pause] It sound like gibberish? Yeah, it sounded
like gibberish to me when I first heard it too and then I was shocked, shocked to find
this message in it. Let me show you. I’m gonna play it for you now with the words of the
backwards message and listen to it and read along and see if it makes sense to you this
time. This is an example of, I’m gonna give you
some context for your brain to reconstruct the reality of the backwards song. [pause]
[Led Zeppelin singing “Stairway to Heaven” played in reverse] [guitar intro] [inaudible lyrics] [guitar fades] So from your laughter I infer that you got
it this time. [laughter] So that probably sounded pretty real to you.
Now you’ve heard the same sounds twice: once it sounded like gibberish and once it sounded
perfectly real. So which was reality? Is it the second time where there was a Satanic
message or was it the first time? Well I’m gonna play it for you another time
now and I want you to decide consciously, I want you to override your unconscious mind,
watch the words, listen to the song, but don’t connect the words with the song this time.
I want you to hear it the first way even though you’re seeing the words.
[Led Zeppelin singing “Stairway to Heaven” played in reverse] [guitar into] [inaudible lyrics] [guitar fades] So were you able to overcome your unconscious
mind? Could you watch the words and hear it yet as gibberish? No, huh. I’m gonna give you one more chance but this
time I’m guessing that you’re spoiled like I am ’cause I’ve heard it so many times now
I cannot, even without the words, I know the words. [laughter] I’m gonna play it for you again without the
words and now I want you to hear it without the Satanic message.
[Led Zeppelin singing “Stairway to Heaven” played in reverse] [guitar intro] [inaudible lyrics] [guitar fades] So could you overcome it or is it still sounding
like the Satan song? Yeah. Well so because people, because of this suggestibility
in this context that makes your brain automatically interpret this, some people once they’re told
this is there and they don’t realize what’s going on they really believe that there is
a Satanic message there because what else could it be? It does sound very real. And
I wanna thank Michael Shermer of the Skeptics Society for the backwards song. You know the
Skeptics Society? You should check it out, skeptics.com and one of the things he does
is go around debunking myths like this where people find Satanic messages. You can take
any backwards sounds, come up with words that sound similar to that, play it, and the same
effect will happen because your mind is using that context to create the reality. So in the rest of the talk I’m gonna talk
about social perception because the point is that these same tricks that your mind uses
in audio and visual perception it also uses in social perception. And these are very useful,
I don’t mean to be talking about these only because of the illusions that they create. If you run into people that look like this
you don’t want to have to always individually analyze what is their role, what is their
job, what do they want from me, how do I interact with them? You wanna be able to automatically
without thinking, without any effort, categorize them and interact with them as a bus driver
or if you see policemen you have to be able to interact with policemen without analyzing
first what are they there for, what’s their role, what’s the gun mean? [laughter] Especially in New York. I give this talk in
New York and they all say, “Yeah, that’s true.” [laughter] Captains of industry and politicians we all
get limited data on these people and then when we think about them especially the politicians
who we’re going to have to vote for or not vote for we form a picture of their character
and their personality, we form what’s often a much clearer picture than we have any right
to because the data that’s coming into our minds is like the data at the side of the
road, it’s very fuzzy, but our minds are forming for us a clear picture. Sometimes that clear
picture, like the picture that we get from the side of the road, is accurate and sometimes
our clear picture is inaccurate, it’s an illusion, like the optical illusions I showed you. And everybody that we meet in the world, your
work colleagues, your acquaintances, your casual friends, it’s something like that;
we get limited data on people and on social situations; we get limited data when we’re
going to make purchases and when we’re thinking about business decisions, but we have a clearer
picture than that data really supports and we don’t realize that the clear picture that
we have is not completely justified but it’s filled in by our unconscious minds and presented
to us as reality. So let’s talk about this a little bit in social
behavior. We’re gonna talk about how your social perception is constructed by your mind.
Since this is an election year I thought it would be good to talk about a nice election
study. You might be a staunch Democrat or a staunch
Republican in which case you’re probably gonna vote one way or the other no matter what.
But a good 20, 25, 30% of the population are what we call swing voters who are in any given
election are undecided. And what they think they’re doing, what they intend to do, is
to judge the candidates based on the issues, based on their experience, based on how competent
they are. But one of the things that they don’t realize they’re doing is they’re judging
people by data that’s fed to them from their unconscious mind to fill in the blanks. And
one of the things that our unconscious mind feeds them is looks. When you look at candidates
you automatically judge competence by the person’s face. And this shows you an example of how that
works. This was a study done in UC Irvine; these are not the actual pictures used from
the study because the papers that were written about it did not have the faces, so I’m illustrating
with these faces. But what they did was they made flyers on supposedly real Congressional
races; they told the subjects of the experiment that these are races outside of your district,
but here’s a political flyer that we made on these two candidates. And the flyer shows
their parties, their stance on some of the issues, their experience, and a photograph
and they were asking people to pick who they thought was the better person for the job.
But they were people outside their district so they were not expected to recognize them. But in reality what they did was they picked
one person to be the Democrat and one person to be the Republican and then they had a Hollywood
makeup artist and a professional photographer create two versions of photos of them for
the flyers. In one version was designed to make them look less competent and another
version was designed to make them look more competent. Prior to this they did a little pilot study
where they studied exactly what features of a person would make them look more or less
competent and then they used what they learned to have these people design two versions of
each candidate. And half the people saw the Republican candidate
in her more competent looking version and the Democrat in her less competent looking
version, and the other half saw the Republican in the less competent looking version and
the Democrat in the more competent looking version. And then they compared the vote that
they would get to see what is the vote swing just based on the degree of competence in
your picture. And they found that when the Republican was
more competent looking, the Republican got 56%of the vote, but when she was less competent
looking she only got 44%. So there was a vote swing there from 44 to 56, I’m sorry 58%,
there was a vote swing of 14%. So 14% of the vote changed based purely on the person’s
picture whether it was a competent looking picture or a less competent looking picture. So I mentioned the Skeptics Society; if you
guys are skeptical you could say, “Well, they were told that this was a real election but
that they had nothing at stake. So this might happen in the laboratory but does it happen
in real life?” And fortunately a fellow at Princeton, a psychologist
named Alexander Todorov, decided to see if this works in real life, so he did something
very impressive. He looked at about 400 elections, gubernatorial, senatorial, congressional elections
and he gathered photos of the candidates and paired them; this was before the 2006 elections.
And he wondered if this effect is real can I predict the outcome of the races by these
pictures? So he had subjects come into the lab and look at the pictures in pairs very
briefly and just pick one; which one looks more competent? And he had hundreds of subjects
do this and he gathered statistics on which of these candidates looked more competent.
And then he created a prediction for all those races based not on political science, not
on party, not on the issues, based purely on who looks more competent to the most people.
So the question is: how successful do you think he would have been? Well, he was actually
very successful; he got 70%of the races correct that way. So what this indicates, this correlation is
that something is going on that when we’re judging people we’re factoring in something
we don’t think we’re factoring which is their appearance. [pause] Another thing that influences us in our social
interactions a great deal is touch. This slide shows four different kinds of primates engaged
in grooming activities. [laughter] Now except for the one in the center, these
primates spend a lot of time, an hour or two every day, doing this grooming even though
it only takes about 10 or 20 minutes to accomplish the physical purpose of the grooming and that’s
because alliances, social alliances are very important for all primates, including us,
and by touching we create bonding and we create trust. And so primates create their social
alliances largely through their touching and their grooming. And the question is: what
about people? Well touch is also very important for people
and in fact in the last few years scientists have even discovered specialized nerves that
are mostly in your arms and your face that don’t work very well for feeling what’s there,
where something is, but transmit the pleasantness of social touch to your brain. So they seem
to be there purely for the bonding experience. And so the question is: how much of an effect
is this? How much of your perception of a scene or of an interaction with someone is
influenced by the touch element? We talked about the looks element but now I’m gonna
talk about the touch element. And my favorite experiment here was done in
France and it involves a few handsome Frenchmen and some French, single French women. This
fellow represents the handsome Frenchman — [laughter] these guys were all in their 20’s and they
were asked to stand on a street corner in a town in Northern France and spend all day
for a few days propositioning single women, single, young women who walked by. And they
were all instructed to say exactly the same thing and this is the translation of it. They
basically say, “Hi my name’s Antoine. You’re very pretty, don’t have time to talk now,
can I have your phone number, I’ll call you later for a drink.” [laughter] But to half of the women they propositioned
they were told to give a very light half second or less touch on the shoulder or the elbow
and to the other half they weren’t; they were told not to do that. And the question was:
what kind of effect does this have on their success rate? Well it had a great effect,
it doubled it. So 10%of the women agreed to the date if they didn’t touch them and 20%
did with the touch. [laughter] Again going to the skeptics side you could
say, “Well touch is actually more directly related to sex. What about other things that
about the influence of touch in other social situations that aren’t so directly related
to the touching you might do later?” [laughter] And so one of the other experiments was done
in restaurants, actually two of them. In one of the experiments they gathered a group of
waiters and waitresses instead of the men and they told them, “When you deal with your
customers I want you somewhere during the interaction to give them a nice light touch,”
for half of them; and for half don’t. “And we’re gonna keep track of your tips and see
if touching them increases your tips.” And sure enough they found that the waitresses
and waiters averaged 14½% tips from the customers they didn’t touch and 17% from the customers
they did touch. And they did a similar experiment on how many people take your recommendation
when you recommend the special and that went up from 40% to 60% with the touch. What about going to the blackboards, this
is one of my pet peeves on this study: they said, “No one in the math class,” and I’ve
taught math classes, “No one in the math class will wanna go to the blackboard.” So they
tested the influence of touch on kids who wanna go to the blackboard in a difficult
statistics class and as the professor’s asking them to go the blackboard and potentially
be embarrassed, and only 9% who weren’t touched went to the blackboard but with this very
subtle touch 28% did. Doctors, where are the doctors? [pause] The doctors have disappeared. Well, that’s
okay. Agreeing to take a mall survey: 53% agreed
to spend five minutes on a mall survey and 76% agreed to take it if they were given a
light touch. So this touch, and oh by the way, in most of these studies the subjects
were debriefed afterward and one of the questions they were asked was, “Did you notice being
touched at any time?” And most of them in the study said that they didn’t even notice
the touch. [pause] Finally I wanna talk about when self provides
the context. So sometimes the context in a social situation has to do with how it matters
to you personally and your own self-image or your own world view. This is Salvador Dali and he famously said,
“Every morning upon awakening, I experience a supreme pleasure: that of being Salvador
Dali, and I ask myself wonderstruck, what prodigious thing will he do today, this Salvador
Dali?” [laughter] Now he may sound like a pompous ass but I
[chuckles] like this quote because this quote is what our unconscious mind wants us all
to feel about ourselves. Because the best chance of success we can have in life if you’re
approaching some difficult problem at Google or if you’re approaching difficult graduate
school or medical school or difficult medical problems, chemotherapy, starting a business
on your own, you have a very big advantage if you feel that you can overcome this and
that you that don’t have perhaps a totally realistic view of what you’re getting into.
And your unconscious mind is very important helping you see that. Let me just show you the results of that.
What happens when you ask people how good they are at things? If you ask high school
kids, “Are you above average?” I don’t know if any of you have high school kids but you’ll
probably know that they’re gonna say, “Yes.” And indeed in a survey of three million high
school kids, 100% of them said they were above average. [laughs] [laughter] I’m guessing they rounded up from 99.99, but.
What about the professors? Do the teachers have a better view? So professors were asked,
“Is your work above average?” Yes, only 94% of them thought so. And here’s some doctors, what about your doctor,
your doctor’s usually confident in your diagnoses. But in one study doctors were confident that
they had diagnosed pneumonia correctly 80% of the time and they were only right 20%of
the time. One of the things your mind does when it gives
you these over inflated views of yourself is it changes the way you treat incoming data;
this is called motivated reasoning. So if you’re completely objective and you look at
data then you might judge the data by the methodology, you might judge the data by the
weight that that particular data should hold, in other words, is that factor that you’re
testing very important? But what your unconscious mind does is it adjusts the weight that you
give to data and it adjusts your view of the methodology in a way to tend to confirm your
preexisting beliefs and desires. So when you’re looking at data, the human
mind does not act as a scientist who’s analyzing data objectively and drawing a conclusion
but your unconscious mind is more like a lawyer who looks at the conclusion that you want
and adjusts the way that you look at the evidence to tend to support that conclusion. And it’s
very important this unconscious ’cause if you try to consciously do it you’re too smart
for that, you’re gonna know that I’m just fooling myself. But your unconscious can fool
you in a way that you’re not aware of and that’s how these things happen. And another thing that your unconscious does
is it adjusts your memory. Your memory, as we’ll see later, is a construction just like
your vision is and your audio and your social perception. What you remember are the broad
strokes of things that happen just like your eyes pick up the broad strokes of the scene
but it’s fuzzy and your brain puts it together, your memory remembers the broad strokes of
events that happen and then fills in the blanks so that you have a very clear memory, a distinct
memory. But that memory uses things like context in addition to data, context, prior knowledge,
beliefs, and desires. So if you ask, for instance, students four
years out of college, “What were your grades?” you’ll find an interesting effect. They tend
to remember their A’s pretty well and their lower grades less and less. In one study scientists gathered together
a bunch of kids who had graduated four years earlier, got them to sign off on their transcripts,
got their transcripts so they could see what their grades were, and the kids had no motive
to lie, and they asked them about their grades. Well they remembered their A’s 89% of the
time, 60% of their B’s, 51% of their C’s, and only 29%of their D’s. So if you were in school, and I always tell
my students, “If you’re getting back grades don’t worry in time your grades will improve.” [laughter] Now in business what happens is this can cause
problems because CEO’s, for instance, tend to overpay for companies because they look
at other companies and they go, “I’m a better CEO than that CEO. One of the problems is
that CEO didn’t know how to run the company. I can run it better.” And so they end up overpaying
for the company. So our unconscious mind creates sincere beliefs
and images of what’s going on in the world, and we believe them as being real, but they’re
not necessarily based purely on data. [pause] This motivated reasoning was illustrated nicely
in a study in Texas. They took subjects and the subjects were all given the data on a
case where an automobile crashed into a car, crashed into a motorcycle and the motorcyclist
was suing the automobile driver. And they gave them the transcript of the case, the
data, and they told half of them, “You’re gonna take the part of the motorcyclist.”
And they told the other half, “You’re gonna take the part of the automobile driver. And
you’re gonna pair up and negotiate your own form of the settlement,” which was between
$0 and $100,000. So they digested all this data and they got
ready to negotiate and then the experimenter said, “Oh wait a minute, before you do that
take your advocate’s hat off, this is just a game after all, so forget the conflict of
interest. I want you to guess what the real settlement was and if you can guess within
$5,000 I’ll give you a cash bonus. So it’s in your financial interest to be objective
here and to ignore any possible motivated reasoning that you had when you were digesting
the data.” So how did they do? Well the subjects who were told that they were going to take
the motorcyclist part guessed on average that a fair settlement would be $40,000, but those
who took the driver’s part guessed only $20,000. So they were unable to overcome, as I said
these are automatic, the unconscious effects are automatic and very hard to control. So
even when money was at stake for them they were unable to be objective in their analysis
of the case. Let’s see if this stuff happens to you. So
we’ll get to those two tests that we did earlier and the first one is called anchoring and
it shows how the context of a situation can affect your consumer behavior. Both groups
were given this question as question number two: “How much would you expect to pay for
this lovely hotel room in Tahiti?” Well, let me tell you what the answers were: Group 1,
that’s you guys right? You guessed on average $1,176. So Group 2 you’re probably a little
bit surprised because you guessed on the average $304. Well what I did do? I exercised mind control
over you guys. From over here I went like that and I got you guys to quadruple your
offer. And how did I do that? That’s because when, I didn’t give you a lot of data on the
hotel room, I gave you some pictures and it was in Tahiti and a little information and
your brain formed some kind of image of what this hotel room is worth. The thing is that
the difference between you guys was the first question I asked. So Group 1 was asked, “Does
this cost more than $5500 a night?” And Group 2 was asked, “Does this cost more than $55
a night?” This is like a throw away question ’cause I think it’s pretty obvious that it
is more than $55 a night and it’s not more than $5500 a night. And you probably didn’t
think too much about it and thought, “Well these questions are a little bit extreme,”
but yet it affected your conscious assessment of what’s going on. So when you watch those late night shows and
they wanna sell you 10 steak knives for $49.95 in the end, but they start off by saying,
“These 10 steak knives are worth $700, we normally sell them for $700 but today just
for you it’s discounted to $49.95.” And you’re probably thinking if you’re like me, “That
$700 what BS, no one would ever pay anything like that.” But what you don’t realize is
they manipulated you to thinking that the $49.95 wasn’t nearly as bad as you might think
if they hadn’t given you the $700 to begin with, as absurd as it is. [pause] So finally let me, let’s go to the other test
which shows you how you create your own memories. What I gave you earlier was this list over
here: candy, sour, sugar, etcetera and then I asked you which of these words appeared
on the list. Well I was telling you how your brain constructs
memories just like it constructs vision based on things like context, and this is a good
illustration of that. Because the word point was not on the list and only two of you guessed
the word point, that’s pretty good and that’s normal. And the word taste was on the list
and 37 of you correctly remembered that the word taste was on the list. But remember I
asked you to only write it down if you’re confident and if you can hear us saying the
word. So I don’t think any of you should have written down sweet because sweet wasn’t on
the list. So if you remembered the word sweet it was what we call a false memory. Your brain
reconstructed that clear as a bell, excuse the pun, but it didn’t hear anything; it’s
just the gist of the list and it filled it in for you. So I said 37 people said taste,
well 37 people also said that sweet was on the list. So this shows you the power of the reconstruction
of your memory and it’s something to be very cognitive of when you read about legal cases
and eyewitness testimony, but we don’t have time for that. So let me just end with a quote from Carl
Yung that I like; I don’t believe in a lot of what he said but some of what he said was
really [inaudible]. “These subliminal aspects of everything that happens to us may seem
to play very little part in our daily lives, but they are the almost invisible roots of
our unconscious thoughts.” Thank you. [laughter] [applause]

Tags: , , , , , , ,

100 thoughts on “Leonard Mlodinow: “Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior” | Talks at Google”

  1. dung victor says:

    Very smart

  2. Avidcomp says:

    “But to think is an act of choice. The key to what you so recklessly call ‘human nature,’ the open secret you live with, yet dread to name, is the fact that man is a being of volitional consciousness. Reason does not work automatically; thinking is not a mechanical process; the connections of logic are not made by instinct. The function of your stomach, lungs or heart is automatic; the function of your mind is not. In any hour & issue of your life, you are free to think or to evade that effort.

  3. Avidcomp says:

    cont/d …But you are not free to escape from your nature, from the fact that reason is your means of survival-so that for you, who are a human being, the question ‘to be or not to be’ is the question ‘to’ think or not to think.’

  4. Jon Wise says:

    1)Thinking and speaking also consists of automatic processes. Information is deleted, distorted, pattern matched (chucked into words or concepts) and only then you are presented with an opportunity of being aware of some of those generalizations that your mind created automatically. You cannot choose to see e.g. a chair as a set of pixels. It's getting automatically pattern matched into a known concept and a word(aka a generalization) without your awareness or choice.

  5. Jon Wise says:

    2)There are innumerous simultaneous things that happen in an environment around you and in your mind. Your only option is to choose 7+-2 things that you want to be aware of. And if you even started practicing some sort of mindfulness meditation, you know how hard it can be just to be aware of just one thing for 30 minutes, without losing focus, or getting into automated thinking.

  6. Avidcomp says:

    You misunderstand me. let me be clearer. I am referring to rational thinking, meaning to use a logical process, in that this is a volitional choice, meaning to take abstractions from the subconscious into the conscious and concreting them, from identification to application. I mistakenly left out the end (") as my post is a quote that I have lifted, but the premise is as I have now described. I ought to have been clearer.

  7. Avidcomp says:

    I like your explanation here. I ought to again refer back to the quote and add that this is a long term characteristic that is being described in order that a person may live and achieve things for their survival and happiness. It's context again is with regard to ethics and values.

  8. Clickie13 says:

    without seeing the slides its pretty pointless watching

  9. Jane Drake Brody says:

    Wow, this would be good if I could see the examples.

  10. scott williamson says:

    Beliefs and repetition that supports belief systems and perception that have physical effects on physiology and outcomes in life was once considered metaphysical woo woo. I guess this shows you cant always wait on science to give the ok to what we probably all know intuitively anyways. This stuff is where religion and spirituality came from thousands of years ago. Maybe there was no proof other than the subjective experiences at the time but now its being taken seriously by science.

  11. jay says:

    who taught you this???

  12. Jon Wise says:

    I'm just fascinated by the brain and I'm a geek, so I find myself sometimes studying very technical stuff (even formulas, reactions, definitions, etc).The brain is amazing,if you know how to use it,I even did stuff like using mnemonics in a lucid dream (remembering a book a dream) and arm levitation using self-hypnosis.
    But I recommend starting with the brain science podcast,then when the interest is there it's easy to study very technical stuff and you find references to books there as well.

  13. sirmarkthomas says:

    They should fire whoever is filming this talk. Slides that he is referencing would be nice to actually see.

  14. DS says:

    Simply: TED Talks > Google Talks. But it's Google, guys… they'll figure it out.

  15. thought2007 says:

    maybe they are there but your unconscious mind is blocking them out

  16. Syed Salman says:

    Ok. I’m irritated. My brother resides in the adjacent room and he just turned superb at picking up all women. The guy found the Master Attraction site (Look in Google) by Jake Ayres. Now I hear him bringing ladies back. He’s continuously having sexy girls back and I can’t help but hear it. It’s nasty. If only he never found that site. My closest friend just signed up and got a blowjob a week later.

  17. Taniwha_NZ says:

    There is a second camera pointed at the projector screen all the time. When they edit the video for upload, they get complete control over the choice to show the speaker, or the projector.

    So what happened? it's painfully obvious that we are NOT getting the correct view of the projector most of the time.

    If they can't be bothered editing the video properly, PLEASE just show the 2nd camera as a smaller box within the main image and just leave it there.

    This gentleman seems nervous and he jumps around without necessarily explaining everything. If we can't see what he's talking about, then watching this video becomes a chore instead of a valuable learning experience.

  18. Norm Bearrentine says:

    The slide where he shows "what you perceive" vs "what your eye picks up," (15:36) is misleading, because the brain doesn't construct visual perception from one mostly blurry image. Our eyes are constantly moving in saccades, so that the brain receives several center-focused images per second. These are consolidated to form an overall clear view of the scene. Context plays a part, but the brain has more information to work with than the slide suggests.

  19. Fernando Cavalcante says:

    Great talk, but it's the shitiest footage of a talk I've ever seen. Shitty camera work. Shittier edition work. Shame on google.

  20. DUME85 says:

    He clapped at the beginning then I clapped I need no further proof the title is true. 

  21. jon jenkins says:

    the guy at the begining looks super nervous

  22. RainbowOverNorway says:

    The camera operator is retarded. Those guns though 😉 Nice talk, would have been great to be able to watch it properly. 

  23. brikster00 says:

    I am sure it's an intersting video but it is so poorly filmed/edited that it is impossible to enjoy. Lame job "Talks at Google."

  24. Denis Gorodetskiy says:

    Awesome talk, but what's up with the camera? You'd better point a camera at what the presenter is trying to convey rather than at the presenter himself

  25. scott williamson says:

    Interesting lecture! I wonder how much of this was influenced by his association with Deepak Chopra? I know he doesn't go to the mystical interpretations that Deepak expounds upon but he does show an interest in this field of mind these days as I only know his work in physics and with Stephen Hawkings.

  26. Shoeshoe MOFOKENG says:

    HE TALKS TOOOOOO MUCH Sheeesh!

  27. zarkoff45 says:

    The non-Freudian unconscious.

  28. FungusWhisperer says:

    "our perception, behavior, memory & social judgment is largely driven by the mind's subliminal processes, not by the conscious ones as WE HAVE LONG BELIEVED" Or (ahem) thought we believed; consciously, far as we knew (muahha)?  Like Dr Morbius, FORBIDDEN PLANET – confidently thinking he thought one thing. Never dreaming his unconscious might have another think coming – for his conscious. Good ol' "Monsters from the Id" …

  29. Dr.Robin Austin,Tx says:

    so true…so very, very true!

  30. Gravity says:

    This Prof. is cool… 

  31. Werewolf Lycan says:

    The average person probably has very little understanding of his or her unconscious mind.. 

  32. luca marco says:

    E' molto simpatico ma il fulcro del suo discorso qual è?
    I limiti dell'attenzione li conosco, i fattori subliminali possono influire ma  in certi contesti. Hanno presa solo su menti poco lucide e consapevoli.
    In conclusione ben poco mi ha trasmesso.

  33. Wilma Jonson says:

    In this tlak the camera work was subliminal, too…

  34. RaGiAn87 says:

    The cameraman needs to be fired, he sucks at his job.

  35. Church Time says:

    im mad at the camerman literally

  36. Dharmendra Rai says:

    Fab Talk ! Fab Book ! 

  37. dalanology says:

    This presentation is fascinating. Also I found it difficult to not fixate on Dr. Mlodinow's magnificent arms.

  38. Carlos Pereira says:

    The world is controlled by this.

  39. Shilpa B says:

    Really bad camera work! It kills the impact of the speech.

  40. gtilapias says:

    in the world of the blind…

  41. Scot Campbell says:

    I have found the best thing I can do for my personal welfare is to stop thinking about stuff all the time. I started on this path about 6 months ago, it feels so much better.

  42. pinkpoo007 says:

    Poorly filmed. Not having a separate screen watching the screen the audience can see. Although nevertheless interesting

  43. marco calarco says:

    The camera work for perfectly fine, the talk was mediocre.

  44. Nick Gregory says:

    Camera work as inattentive to our needs as Google is.

  45. Al S says:

    I love his books, just discovered this video. He has been a part of some of the great research of our time, you will discover, if you read is writings. Too bad about his name at the start, did not even ask him how he pronounces his name, introducer on par with camera tech.

  46. Dhyan Asheesh KASHINATHGAUTAM says:

    nonsense, centre point is missing.

  47. Arcadian Wings says:

    Interesting presentation, thank you for sharing it! I was wondering: does this unconscious perception also apply to the picture of "the dress" that caused so much confusion on the social media around February this year? And if so: which one of both perceptions were (un)conscious? Or is there never an 'objective' perception?

  48. Martti Suomivuori says:

    Mlodinow's books are actually quite good. He has a strong scientific background and his writing is very clear and concise.
    He has co-authored a book with Stephen Hawking.
    This presentation is quite boring. His books are better.

  49. StevenGaspard says:

    the "sweet" experiment is questionable. folks were unlikely to be focused on listening to the list of words being spoken to begin with… they were likely studying the list visually and ignoring the spoken words to better absorb the list to memory.

  50. sticky frog says:

    The editor of this video wasn't paying attention.

  51. A_Socialist_Channel says:

    Many people will misunderstand and misinterpret what this means. And many more will not understand what this means for their daily lives.

  52. Wasna Nimityongskul says:

    Wonderful!!! Thank you for your knowledge sharing. Wanna see contents on the projector screen longer. Two screens might help.

  53. LJS says:

    0:05 WHOOSH! 🙂

  54. DIY Life says:

    I would have loved to hear something more practical, how we can use this to reprogram ourselves intentionally. Those things were interesting, but nor particularly useful.

  55. Mônica Miranda says:

    He missed a point when he talked about the road sign. When you are driving, you don't use your logical reasoning, rather you reason by comparisn or intuition. The road sign depending on the sign may never be noticed, at least not by you conscious mind. That is when traffick engineers may get fooled. Drivers pay more attention to the context. Some German roads have signs with the sin the road does with the Earth tangent plane at that point to show how steep the road is . They may think they got it right from drivers, but it is the context that counts. You don't do trigs at 100 km/h.

  56. Mônica Miranda says:

    I have noticed that people construct a lot when they hear. When I go about the streets near my home that are shops that plays some kind of bad taste folk songs. I just can not hear them right. They kind of not reach my mind and what I hear is something so funny and different that I can not help bursting out laughing.

    I have an enormous difficulty in understanding what I hear, but my hearing tests shows that I can hear very high pitches, even dog's whistles. The problem is I can not construct or I do it with a lot of difficulty and very slowly. I had a dream where two people came to me to explain the way I hear. One of them was a professor at the university I studied. His name is Jacob Zimbarg Sobrinho. The other person was Brazil's first lady at the time, Ruth Cardoso. Both were alive at the time. He is a mathematician. She was an anthropologist. I would be kind of both had life given me the chance.

    I really got impressed by Led Zeppelin's song analysis.

    Our unconscious see much more and in more dimensions than our eyes can see. And so with our ears. However our unconscious mind is like a blind, deaf powerful giant in this world. It needs our conscious minds to carry that lamp to guide him. The lamp is the world of Jesus Christ and our understanding of it. I took this example from Carl Jung biography. He did not mention Jesus Christ, though, but he was a Christian and as a Christian the word of Jesus Christ was part of his conscious mind.

    I kind of like the work of Carl Jung a lot and I would like to read the presenter's books.

  57. Santi Amen says:

    If unconscious mind can create our present reality driving our vision and hearing, and additionally can create our past based on the interpretation and recreation of memories, there should be some way in which it creates our future too. Am I right?

  58. Angela Brown says:

    This guy sucks I didn't understand a word he was talking about

  59. Allen Comeau says:

    A cameraman that could follow the content and actually capture the visuals would very helpful to this presentation.

  60. Jason Sambo says:

    just check out the PBS doc. on deer. See if you can find the subliminal plug for the 'Exorcist theme music'. Hint: It's right near and LB.

  61. Jason Sambo says:

    hi @28 min.
    that would be "make me a cyborg"

  62. Jason Sambo says:

    missed the "no that's Satan"
    Look on the bright side though.
    At least there's no 'leaving home with a brown eyed man or cooling of towns with aids cadillac.
    that'd be evil…

    for me though it's more of a……
    once upon a 205 while driving near Nicholson drive, I realized how Nato was not redrumEd in a day.

  63. Solom Hegazy says:

    When therre is a slide forr us to see, you show it, simple.

  64. Michael Turany says:

    hay Lenard mlodinow your camera man sucks

  65. Edwin van gent says:

    agree the camera man doesn't show the pictures on the screen so we can't follow the lecture. very bad. so i stopped watching thx very much.

  66. Sturgeon says:

    Is this the guy who smacked down Deepak Chopra?

  67. David Flynn says:

    Seriously, Great talk.
    Less seriously, "Slightly larger handful'. Oh come on, nobody laughed!
    PS. I saw it, but if I am honest, only because I knew there was going to be something else.

  68. Open-minded Skeptic says:

    “I am very comfortable with the idea that we can override biology with free will.” – Richard Dawkins

  69. jef jef says:

    is there any problem if i download a subliminal from utube

  70. Tati Rodriguez says:

    in Beyonce's "Haunted" play it backwards and it has a similar effect

  71. Simon Svetlik says:

    should be better edited…

  72. Tyler says:

    when does he explian the tests? grrrrr..

  73. aleph null says:

    Out of a lot of talks floating on YT and in general on mind control and unconsciousness, where a lot of charlatans and bs artists just spew crap, this talk is very good and makes sense by showing things/experiments where you actually see the things and biases being presented, unlike in those hacks' presentations, where they either completely do not know what they are talking about or do not give enough motivation to pursue and follow the talk. The examples this guy gave were convincing for upping your motivation to listen to and think about what the talk is about. And he does not disappoint your expectations. So, well done.

    He actually made a good impression and gave a good info that I will actually bother to internalize.

  74. Edward Queen says:

    I saw the ladder and the face easily. Does sexuality play a part in determining what high interest image is? Because I'm not exactly interested in women.

  75. Angela Sweeney says:

    Great video. Alot of ideas and concepts that are very useful to know 👍🏽

  76. Cymbelin Parker says:

    The camera work was terrible, as if the person behind it had a crush on the speaker. Lost interest a third of the way through due to frustration of not seeing the images.

  77. Andrea Durham says:

    So interesting but unfortunately frustrating because we do t get to see what the audience sees☹️

  78. Marko Sunjka says:

    Remember kids: this guy is a physicist, not a psychologist. What he says is said with determination and confidence! No such thing would be found in a psychologist's, or better yet – a good methodologist's, repetoar. He is not credible, he is a physicist. He is milking his position. I hope that most of you agree. You wouldn't be accepting medical or law advices from a mathematician now, would you? 🙂

  79. SW627 says:

    I'd like to shoot this fuckin' cameraman ! It's like he did this on purpose……he must have, because even I know better !

  80. Osmani Juarez says:

    The second video of this topic and the same problem the video editing. But in general good speech.

  81. Alberto Bio-Science says:

    in the minute 21.27 … about that, I'm not a native English speaker, but still possible for me to understand Legislators. The unconscious mind also uses other languages resources to communicate itself.

  82. Paul Dud says:

    google/youtube and Apple has and is becoming a problem. Sadly, the government will someday soon make laws to control some of what they say and do. A Chinese worker for Apple was recently caught stealing high tech Apple info. and smuggling it to China. An employee/CEO of youtube, friggin lesbian discriminated a customer into months of lost work, causing her to shoot up the joint and commit suicide at youtube head quarters etc.. These greedy tech people , in their haste to change our world forget, that certain technology needs to be voted on and that would be the best way to know if their technology is best for society or not.

  83. www.craigdaub.blogspot.com says:

    I mean, it's cool that they've confirmed all of this. But this has been talked about in occult circles since the mid 1800s. This is nothing new folks. Just a scientific confirmation. All you have to do is evaluate your own life and actions and those of others and this all becomes obvious.

  84. Merit Ocrassie says:

    Google knew this info and still couldn't manipulate the US public to get Hillary elected. Sad.

  85. Daniella Kalil says:

    Alguém pode traduzir este vídeo pro Português e fazer está caridade para nós?
    😅😅😅😅

  86. EVANGELOS KOULIATSIS says:

    Just change the title to "Subliminal:How your Shadow self (ego) rules over your reactions to the experience of life" and take what he says as what to observe,witness or be aware (or mindfull) of as it "unfolds" and creates your everyday life.Realising exactly this function of yours and how it affects your emotions (Energy in MOTION….'energy follows thought',Tiller) and then how emotions affect the 5 body senses is called 'Know thy self'.Percieve it simply as a linear correspondance of those 3 functions (Mind,Psyche,Body)…with the mind always being the ruler of em all.Feeding the mind with 'higher information' (academic knowledge we call it nowadays) is the way to excercise the strongest of your functions.With it strong you can overcome the vices of the psyche and body.Once this level of experiencing and guiding yourself is attained then you are what have been called 'Master of the Self'.Only after this selfrealisation (selfawareness and selfmastery) you can go further and try to actually understand the whats,the hows,and above all the WHYS of the universe,the Cosmos……And thus open the doors towards becoming a 'Master of the Universe'……

  87. AM ROcK says:

    we need to see more of the screen.. than leo's face

  88. Tayyab Babar says:

    Can someone tell me the summary?

  89. Osxkarallmyfriendsaredead says:

    Do I need to read the book or to watch this? Is it the same?

  90. easyifyoutry says:

    what are the takeaways from this?
    Couple of tricks in negotiation, touch, eye contact.
    Anchoring? what else

  91. Jose Torres says:

    Did they really think this was youtube worthy? Was this the last day of the editor and he gave 0 fucks?!

  92. Pearl * Tears says:

    How about that GEICO commercial with the CAMEL….Talk about SUBLIMINAL MESSAGES

  93. Ben Curzon says:

    I think the camera man is in love

  94. Chris Langlois says:

    To everyone complaining about the "Cameraman". It seems like this is being recorded using a speaker track system. It's most useful in video conferencing and stuff. Basically, there is a camera on the back wall and it uses audio cues to determine who is speaking in the room and then zooms in on them while following them. It is completely autonomous.

    This is why there is a little bit of a delay sometimes where he will go partly out of the frame and then the camera will center on him. This is also why the camera never focuses on the screen because the screen is not the one talking.

  95. Eric Rounce says:

    I do not personally have access to the published and indeed, unpublished research.

    I may not also be able to read or understand such research.

    I am therefore totally dependent upon those controlling the field in order to build any conclusions.

    Now isn't that subliminal?

    Case in point. It seems the common opinion that the mind resides in the brain. As a result Brain scans are relied upon to give indication of mental activity. Is the heart also scanned at the same time? How about the "gut"? We certainly have enough common parlance metaphor which points to intelligent thought beyond the brain.

    I think people do well to question their basic assumptions, not only what they are, but also from whence they arise. This is important because daily political, medical, and extremely vital and impactful decisions are made each day individually and collectively which depend on basic assumptions. Those who can most influence those assumptions in the minds of most people, will and do ultimately rule. Now that is the power of subliminal!

    JUST SANE ™

  96. Eric Rounce says:

    Ineffective as a speaker. I can imagine book sales were disappointing. I want my 45 minutes back.

    Einstein said (at least do I've heard) that if you cannot express your ideas in simple terms, you do not know your subject well enough. Now this messenger was not able to make connection with the audience. Good research (maybe) but how does that cook my rice?

  97. Joe Ellerbrock says:

    Unusual is her 48+ cup size.

  98. spidey web says:

    Ok, don't watch this because it's horrible. The book on the other hand is great!

  99. Crystalclarity says:

    you are great!

  100. yshk viswanatham says:

    Water you regularly drink asper your body size you must drink water. 3-5 liters in every day drink it then when you do excises the don't drink water it is bad results on your body . Water drinking habit is need it every human hear human means male and female you can treated it self .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *