Just FYI, I am considering downvoting this (and see that other people have downvoted it) because it reads like an advertisement (and maybe just is an advertisement?). I don’t feel like I learned anything new from the post.
“One-shotting is possible” is a live hypothesis that I got from various reports from meditation traditions.
I do retract “I learned nothing from this post”, the “How does one-shotting happen” section is interesting, and I’d like it to be more prominent. Thanks for poking, I hope I’ll find the time to respond to your other comment too.
any suggestions for how to talk about this stuff without having it read like an advertisement? i’m genuinely interested in the idea of one-shotting and legibilizing evidence that quick growth is possible
I have a few thoughts on this, though I have strong anti-advertising sentiments and might be overly sensitive to these things, so take it with a grain of salt.
The title sounds a little click baity. It’s directed at the reader. The title “Do patients need years of therapy, or can one conversation resolve their issue?” is functionally identical, but feels less like an advert.
The opening reads somewhat like a common advert tactic: “I hated how business did [thing x] since it was bad for the customer, so I started my practice by doing [thing y] which is both more appealing to a potential customer and delivers better results!’.
I think the advertising vibe might also come from the continued references to your personal practice / mentions of it’s successes:
Oh I like “patients” (“clients”). I’ll think about the rest, thanks. I’m just not sure how to write anything useful and legible without talking about my own experience and what I have the most data for?
Also I see the point of your last bullet where “my business” is the subject hm
I gave your post to Claude and gave it the prompt “Dearest Claude, here’s the text for a blogpost I’ve written for LessWrong. I’ve been told that “it sounds a lot like an advertisement”. Can you give me feedback/suggestions for how to improve it for that particular audience? I don’t want to do too much more research, but a bit of editing/stylistic choices.”
(All of the following is my rephrasing/rethinking of Claude output plus some personal suggestions.)
Useful things that came out of the answer were explaining more about the method you’ve used to achieve this, since your bullet-point list in the beginning isn’t detailed enough for anyone to try to replicate the method.
Also notable is that you only have positive examples for your method, which activates my filtered evidence detectors. Either make clear that you indeed did only have positive results, or name how many people you coached, for how long, and that they were all happy with what you provided.
Finally, some direct words from Claude that I just directly endorse:
For LessWrong specifically, I’d also recommend:
Adding a section on falsifiability—how would you know if your approach doesn’t work?
Discussing potential failure modes of your approach
Including more technical details on your methodology (not just results)
Especially, how would you be able to distinguish between your approach convincing your customers they were helped, instead of actually changing their behavior? That feels like the failure mode of most self-help techniques—they’re “self-recommending”.
since your bullet-point list in the beginning isn’t detailed enough for anyone to try to replicate the method.
Wait I’m confused- this is not the purpose of the post
Also notable is that you only have positive examples for your method
The purpose of this post is not advertisement. It’s to discuss one-shots
Especially, how would you be able to distinguish between your approach convincing your customers they were helped, instead of actually changing their behavior?
Just FYI, I am considering downvoting this (and see that other people have downvoted it) because it reads like an advertisement (and maybe just is an advertisement?).
I don’t feel like I learned anything new from the post.This surprises me! Wait so-
The “How does one-shotting happen?” section didn’t have anything interesting for you? (Have you seen stuff like this elsewhere?)
Did you already know one-shotting was possible?
“One-shotting is possible” is a live hypothesis that I got from various reports from meditation traditions.
I do retract “I learned nothing from this post”, the “How does one-shotting happen” section is interesting, and I’d like it to be more prominent. Thanks for poking, I hope I’ll find the time to respond to your other comment too.
any suggestions for how to talk about this stuff without having it read like an advertisement? i’m genuinely interested in the idea of one-shotting and legibilizing evidence that quick growth is possible
Hey Chris!
I have a few thoughts on this, though I have strong anti-advertising sentiments and might be overly sensitive to these things, so take it with a grain of salt.
The title sounds a little click baity. It’s directed at the reader. The title “Do patients need years of therapy, or can one conversation resolve their issue?” is functionally identical, but feels less like an advert.
The opening reads somewhat like a common advert tactic: “I hated how business did [thing x] since it was bad for the customer, so I started my practice by doing [thing y] which is both more appealing to a potential customer and delivers better results!’.
I think the advertising vibe might also come from the continued references to your personal practice / mentions of it’s successes:
“So when I started my business, I made payment contingent on results:”
“Our clients are often surprised at how we do things because it’s so different than the therapy or other coaching they’ve done before:”
“Several of my clients have resolved lifelong issues like anxiety in one shot”
“My business is expanding to help more people in deeper and more efficient ways.”
Finally, it concludes with a link to where people can schedule a call with you.
Oh I like “patients” (“clients”). I’ll think about the rest, thanks. I’m just not sure how to write anything useful and legible without talking about my own experience and what I have the most data for?
Also I see the point of your last bullet where “my business” is the subject hm
I gave your post to Claude and gave it the prompt “Dearest Claude, here’s the text for a blogpost I’ve written for LessWrong. I’ve been told that “it sounds a lot like an advertisement”. Can you give me feedback/suggestions for how to improve it for that particular audience? I don’t want to do too much more research, but a bit of editing/stylistic choices.”
(All of the following is my rephrasing/rethinking of Claude output plus some personal suggestions.)
Useful things that came out of the answer were explaining more about the method you’ve used to achieve this, since your bullet-point list in the beginning isn’t detailed enough for anyone to try to replicate the method.
Also notable is that you only have positive examples for your method, which activates my filtered evidence detectors. Either make clear that you indeed did only have positive results, or name how many people you coached, for how long, and that they were all happy with what you provided.
Finally, some direct words from Claude that I just directly endorse:
Especially, how would you be able to distinguish between your approach convincing your customers they were helped, instead of actually changing their behavior? That feels like the failure mode of most self-help techniques—they’re “self-recommending”.
Wait I’m confused- this is not the purpose of the post
The purpose of this post is not advertisement. It’s to discuss one-shots
See above