Tell me what was your inspiration for writing this? Hands down a masterpiece!…

Let us agree right up front that as statistically accurate statements they fail miserably. AND if anyone is tossing them off as such, then that person is a charlatan. AND we have far too many of that sort in the training industry. They are in the same category of those who use trite sayings such as “There is no *I* in TEAM” — As if the letters of a word have anything to do with the meaning of a concept.

When someone uses the phrase “We only use 10% of our brains”… if they actually mean that there is a piece of our brain, consisting of 90% of its physical weight, that is dormant, devoid of electrical activity, then that person should not be allowed access to powerpoint, a flip chart or a microphone.

If on the other hand, the person means that by not having, and using, problem solving methodolgies, or not willing to explore new ideas without being afraid of being outside their comfort zone… that the person is using less than 10% of their potential… is there ANYONE here that would not agree with that assessment?

All of the cliches disparaged in the original post – contain a germ of truth. One cannot learn about being a teacher UNTIL one actually gets up and teaches… ie. we DO learn better by doing, than by listening, or even seeing.

All of the cliches disparaged can provide and excellent opportunity to explore and discuss the concepts they’re referring to.

In a sense, criticizing a well worn cliche is nothing but a cheap shot, that ignores the truths hidden in these phrases. Even my ‘attack’ on ‘There’s no I in TEAM’ falls into that category. But I’ve yet to hear anyone use that inanity in a competent manner. So I beg for a special dispensation.

Peter de Jager
webinars.technobility.com

Quote 1: Do you really believe it would be a more scientific statement to say we remember “13%” of what we read? Round figures are meant to give a support for doing, rather than writing, rather than reading. It is like saying “A stitch in time saves 9″ – should it be 9.54? Doesn’t make sense, does it?

Quote 2: This has been said in the context of making a presentation (not asking a question from a passer-by). Again the “7%” and so on are indicative figures, and need not be so accurate. The quote just means to say that expression and tone of voice are important parts of presentation.

Quote 3: I think anybody not able to understand this saying has not tried a creative activity for a long time. When a person gets creative, he tries all sorts of possible things – the things most of us would never do in our life. The sort of thing Galois did in mathematics within his 22 years of life.

I remember a classmate of mine in school remembered the page number of each definition that he read in the science book. It is as though the page numbers would really matter! Similarly the percentages do not matter, what matters is reading the sayings correctly.

Quashing “myths” by interpreting them in a different context is a fruitless exercise. This is surely one of the least worthy article on this site.

Sadly every one seems to agree with whatever you write. Supposedly, this is in line with your argument of “Everyone can be happy with what they believe in”.

Stephen
http://www.edenchanges.com

Amitabh Thakur,
SP(Intll),
Faizabad
India
# 94155-34526

anyway, good blog.

http://westallen.typepad.com/idealawg/2007/03/what_is_the_big.html

Yes: they influence people’s behavior, which gives them a kind of truth. If everyone believes that children born with a birthmark on their right ear are born bad, they will treat such children as though they are bad, and some number of those children will respond by acting badly. So the belief can create an effect in the real world through the actions and reactions of those who believe it.

No: the underlying reality is not influenced by people’s beliefs, and is accessible at any time. Stop acting on your belief about right-ear birthmarks, and the inherent goodness of children born with them will re-assert itself with the next generation.

Ideas whose effects are achieved only through mutual belief are only a coating of pseudo-reality overlaying the deeper reality. Such ideas limit our ability to adapt to the world whenever we fail to distinguish them from the more fundamental layers of reality.

For example, the old belief (in some societies) in women’s inferior intellect became “true,” in a sense, through the subsequent denial of stimulation and opportunity to women, but such a belief remains dangerous and limiting of human potential, no matter how many people believe it. It behooves us to stand up against such fallacies whenever we find them.

Reality is hard enough to understand! We need everyone’s contribution to a clearer understanding of the world, so that together we may move toward a fuller appreciation of how things work. Let’s not accept or propagate known falsehoods. Let’s not repeat supposed facts simply because we heard them somewhere or even because an “authority” told them to us.

In an age of mass communication, Mark Twain’s saying is certainly true: “A lie can go halfway around the world while truth is still pulling on its boots.” (Oh, dear! Twain didn’t really say that. It was Charles Spurgeon. No, wait: Spurgeon said it in 1855, but he was quoting an older proverb. Darn it! The truth is slippery!)

Let’s be thorough seekers after truth, no matter how many times it slips through our fingers!

I acknowledge and appreciate your effort and great site with lot of good and valuable articles. Keep up the good work. Do look at my blog too give your review.

http://shabbarsuterwala.blogspot.com/

Thanks and Regards
Shabbar Suterwala

Its like saying that superstitions are born out of coincidences…and they stay with us that way.

As trainers we do use a lot of these “statistics” to drive home a point. It helps telling people that if they practice something the chances that they will remember it are more..and the flip side is that if you practice the “wrong shot” will you end up perfecting that?

Trainers use the Johari Window questionnaire, the Thomas Killman exercise to teach something…and if we took these tests ourselves we may end up masking our answers.But they still help us to train and teach on basics. I liked the reference to Maslow’s theory of needs…it is still used…

Even though behavioral scientists have not found any evidence to corroborate Abraham Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Needs”, it continues to be the most popular motivational theory used by managers and academics — because it is so intuitive. So are most ‘myths’ like the ones mentioned in the article — they are intuitive and therefore easy to adapt and use; unlike many statistically correct theories, which are all head and no heart.

Any theory should engage both the emotional and the rational brain to be effective. Similarly although there is little corroboration for NLP in any standard HR textbooks, it continues to be used ‘effectively’ much like many placebos in medical science.

As long as these are used for illustrating a point rather than to exploit the inherent gullibility of most people, it is fine. But, yes the fact that these are ‘myths’ does help in avoiding a fundamentalist attitude of certitude.

Quite an interesting article…

My take on these myths is that they can be right or absolutely wrong..but doest it really matter? A trainer uses such facts (or fictitious things) to drive home some point and if that point is received well and learners are able to achieve the objectives of the training, then the material used becomes inconsequential.

However, the trainer has to take care that no learner is adding to their already-existing confusion and ‘mental garbage’ through the content of the program. Rest all is okay.

Even if you remove these myths (with some great efforts), there are dozen others waiting to occupy the emptied space…then why bother at all?

World will always be drenched in emotions of all sorts and mankind’s pursuit of happiness will perpetually add colors that are unknown and open vistas that are unheard of…why argue…let’s be game

Myth # 1: while the percentages are silly, (like most statistical percentages) as they are rounded, the reality is that human beings do remember things they have seen or done themselves. When the objective of a learning is to develop a skill, it MUST be accompanied by an activity. That way, the natural resistance to the learning that people have i.e. “it is all well for you, but will not work in my situation…” will break down.

Myth # 2: I personally feel that this is very applicable when we look at it as meaning being communicated. Using the same example, if I am lost in deepest China and am trying to find out how to get to point X, my entire demeanour would shout ‘help! I am lost…’. That is the message I am communicating. A helpful stranger would obviously use body language i.e. pointing to a direction or other hand symbols to help. If they can’t, they mime that they can’t speak the language, thus communicating their inability to help. Words do play a lesser role in that instance.

I do think that this is a well written article and would be very interested in reading more articles from this writer.

Regards,
Asha