[jasonfarnon]

"because of what I learned." Do these books/seminars actually teach you something new about being married or a father, that you didn't know before? Like what? I always figured they were more about coaching, persuasion, convincing. To the extent I've scanned them, I never saw any kind of new fact, definitely not about something like being married.

[thepryz]

I view self help books in a similar light as management books. They're usually not going to teach me anything new. What they will do is present something I already know, in potentially new ways and new contexts that allow me to contemplate them and keep them more front of mind. I tend to think of it almost like right thought right action. It's also worth noting that sometimes you just need to be at the right moment in time for a lesson to resonate and stick so reading such books can provide more opportunity for that to happen.

I do, however, try to limit who and what I read though because there is a lot of derivative garbage out there.

[phlsa]

Exactly that.

I also think of reading self-help books (or management books) as giving myself time to engage with the subject. Even if there is no groundbreaking new information, it gives me time to think about the topic. If you couldn't tell yet, I'm a slow reader.

[nmcfarl]

I am not a slow reader, but I realized what you did - that these books give me a chance to engage with the topic and if I spend enough time with a subject, I might learn something from myself even if I learn zero from the actual book.

My solution to this problem is to set these books next to one of the two comfy chairs in the house. When I sit in one of these chairs, I consider whether I want to read a chapter, I can only read one chapter, I can only have two of these books going at one time.

And under the system it takes me about three months to finish one of the books up from less than a week. I also find I no longer hate• most of them and I learn a lot more.

• they still have a very high DNF rate.

[sanswork]

I'm definitely a better father because of a bunch of the self help books I've read. Things like better ways to communicate with my son, more effective ways to transfer knowledge, encourage independence, etc. Other areas of my life have definitely improved too though I agree when people say most self help books could be a blog post and in cases where it's an expansion of a blog post I'll generally just go read that.

With these types of books(and I read a lot of self help) I generally expect to get like 1-2 good pieces of advice/ideas per 200 pages so I generally just scan through them until I hit areas that seem high value then read those areas more deeply. I've read all of Tim Ferriss' books and haven't really gotten anything I can think of from his stuff to be honest they are a bit too general for me but I've gotten some good advice from his podcast though I only listen to maybe one episode in 10 when it is with someone or about something that sounds very interesting and even then I tend to scrub through it since there is a lot of filler in a 2 hour podcast.

[rfc3092]

Please share “better father” books.

[AnimalMuppet]

Here's the problem: You can be a bad father by being too strict, or you can be a bad father by being too lenient.

In Zion National Park there's a hike called Angel's Landing. You wind up on this ridge, with a 1000 foot cliff on one side and a 500 foot cliff on the other side. And the ridge is not very wide - only a couple of feet in some places.

Parenting is like that. You think, oh, I see people causing problems by being too strict, so I want to back away from that cliff. But there's a cliff behind you, so don't back too far...

And the problem with parenting books is that, if you're the kind of parent who needs the books warning you about being too strict, then the books that warn against being too lenient are probably the ones that resonate more with you. That is, you're drawn to the ones you don't need, not to the ones that you do need.

All that said, yes, get books and read them. Be sure to get a variety of them.

I can't give specifics off the cuff, as I'm well past that phase now.

[frankosaurus]

Well stated.

I read Nurture Shock before my kids were born. One of its main arguments is to praise effort rather than natural abilities ("you worked hard" rather than "you're smart"). Being one who naturally withholds praise, its message of not over-praising resonated with me.

In retrospect, I should have praised kid #1 more. It took me 10+ years to realize that. The book was not wrong but also not the message I needed.

[digitaltrees]

I am definitely of the same generation. I notice my mom will praise my kid’s intelligence while we praise their effort. But I’ve definitely noticed my son responds to praise about ability more than my daughter and likely would appreciate more praise than her.

What did you notice and what were the consequences of the strategy of praise. I’d like to learn from your experience.

[genxy]

I really enjoyed this 'Newel of Knowledge' video on how to deliver praise w/o triggering someones BS detector https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-ZE601hf28

tl;dw celebrate don't manipulate.

I have noticed that my daughter responds so much better to compliments like, "I am really impressed how you handled situation X, you stuck up for yourself in a way that doesn't alienate yourself with your friends. I know how hard that is to do well ..." When I give the reason for the praise it doesn't come off, intended or not as "you did good for a kid." I don't do it everytime, but sometimes the praise works to give another reflective or metacognitive pass over the event.

[frankosaurus]

Praise is a verbal activity. And while words definitely matter, I think holistic encouragement is needed. Pats on the back, hugs, and periodic ambient physical presence when the kid is working on a new skill.

Children the Challenge chapter 3 discusses encouragement.

All this stuff should be done tastefully and without being overbearing. Like the previous poster said, it's a balance.

[digitaltrees]

Totally agree especially since each kid is different and responds to the same technique differently. But there are common things like attachment theory, boundaries creating safety, the tactics of repair after conflict.

[murkt]

“Never Split the Difference”, which is a book about how to successfully communicate with terrorists. Very suitable for talking with kids!

I’ve even read aloud a few chapters to my kids, because it’s very suitable for communication with parents as well

[Fantosism]

I mean this with the purest intentions. I've read Never Split the Difference, Never Eat Alone, Getting More, How to Win Friends and Influence People, etc. How do you get it to feel like it's not manipulation? I get all of these books advertise not to lie, but at the end of the day, I'm reshaping my speech to achieve a certain goal, rather than to convey facts. The best line I've come up with is something like: am I serving the other person's actual interests, and would I be fine with them seeing exactly what I'm doing? Honest persuasion seems to survive that test; manipulation usually needs the other person not to notice. Curious how you draw this line? Keep in mind I don't have kids, so haven't really ventured into white lie territory being a necessity.

[runako]

> I'm reshaping my speech to achieve a certain goal, rather than to convey facts.

When communicating, you don't simply recite every datum you know. You edit, you choose facts to communicate a specific set of points. Those points themselves are not random; they are in service of helping you achieve some goal (to get someone to laugh, or to get someone to do/not do something, or to change someone's opinion of you, to make someone feel comfortable, to get a person to bond with you, or whatever).

> am I serving the other person's actual interests

This is the key.

> would I be fine with them seeing exactly what I'm doing

See my first paragraph. Nobody thinks you are reciting facts at random when you talk to them. QED to the extent anyone thinks about it, they understand that you are trying to advance some agenda (drop the connotation on that word). Because this is how human communication works.

[tarsinge]

At their core all these self help books are not teaching you how to reshape your speech, but emotional intelligence. They are teaching better understanding of other and yourself. You can then use this understanding to have more fulfilling relations, or more easily manipulate others if you are less well intentioned. The line is very easy to draw, being honest is natural, you say the truth and are open to genuinely understand and build on the other person responses. On the other hand manipulating takes a very different mindset of faking being open to what others are saying.

[bildung]

Many people, especially in the tech field, have false perceptions about the inner workings of the human brain. We aren't rational automatons receiving exactly the data that has been sent out by the other automatons. That's for a multitude of reasons, the most obvious of that is the fact that only a very miniscule part of our thought is conscious (about 2% is the last number I've read about it). Even the fundamental inner workings of the brain differ from the idea you alluded to. Our brain isn't just a parser interpreting the data we receive - instead it is a black box constantly predicting what happens next, and only uses sensory input, both from the outside and from the inside of the body, to validate or falsify the prediction [1]. One of the obvious side effects if this is for example our tendency to ignore facts that don't fit to our current worldview.

So if I know that these things are as they are, and use them to communicate more successfully, is that manipulation? Then it would also be learning manipulation if kids are sent to school to learn how to write well, or how to do a presentation.

I had a situation with my kid a while ago. They were already tired, but had to take a shower. When I proposed that verbally, they denied. Then I showed them the warm water coming out of the showerhead, and they instantly agreed. So I got what I wanted (the kid getting clean), because I knew how to communicate successfully. But that isn't manipulation: I didn't lie, I didn't have a personal advantage at their cost etc. I just made it easier for them to anticipate what taking a shower would feel like.

So perhaps the distinction should be: If I can honestly and wholeheartedly argue to myself that my intentions are to the best of all participants, then that is communication. If I only care about my outcome, or even want to have adverserial outcome for the others, then that is manipulation.

But we can't use "not noticing" some mode of communication as part of the definition of manipulation simply because we all notice almost nothing consciously, compared to the sensory input we get every second of our lifes.

[1] A pretty approachable book about that, written from a researcher: How emotions are made, from Lisa Feldman Barret

[digitaltrees]

Exactly this. And I'll share a similar comment. I found myself repeating instructions to my 4 year old ans getting frustrated. I watched a parenting video that suggested getting down on her physical level and gently touching her shoulder to get her attention. The theory being when she is focused on something fun or interesting she literally can't hear me or shift her attention.

It worked the first time and has reduced my own emotional reaction and create much more peace.

And while I won't suggest it will work for everyone or this is a scientific process with sufficient information (but should be explored) I find resources like this useful.

[digitaltrees]

I think you’re on the right track. Manipulation is overriding someone’s will in service of your motives. Persuasion is offering new information, while respecting their autonomy to make their own choice. So you are right that intention matters a lot. And the reason it matters is that your commitment to their wellbeing is an investment in the relationship which is a mutual interaction over time not a single event.

That’s also why authenticity and honesty matter. If you lie to your children or spouse or colleague they might do what you want one time but over time not trust you. If you are inauthentic they will also learn that you have ulterior motives and become distrustful.

The last thing I’ll say is it’s not always a negotiation. With young kids or direct reports there is elevation in the relationship, meaning one person gets to make the decision and the other gets to follow the instructions. So when a toddler is saying I don’t want to brush my teeth if you treat it like a negotiation you actually make them less secure about their place in the world because they aren’t ready to make every decision for themself. One good technique I learned is to simply present two choices. “You can brush your teeth or let me brush your teeth”. That’s very different than “let’s go brush your teeth” which can be answered yes or no. So it’s not always necessary to engage in persuasion. Sometimes framing is all you need.

[Cthulhu_]

I've often felt the same way; I've read some of these and (think I) can spot people using those learned things a mile away, and it immediately raises my hackles up. Management and sales people especially. Touch my shoulder or try to shake my hand palm-down just raise alarm bells.

But that's the other side of these books, understanding "the other side" of people.

I like to believe it all adds up to a big pile of knowledge that finds its place in one's personality / outwards behaviour. But to more observant, introspective, overthinking, possibly neurodiverse people, it just adds to a giant pile of social behaviours that some people seem to have naturally while others have learned / are forcing them.

Doing them costs me energy and makes me feel underhanded / ungenuine. At the same time maybe doing it more often will make them feel natural? I have no idea.

[murkt]

Touching shoulders and shaking hands palm-down is “persuasion” bullshit.

Can’t say anything about other books, but Never Split the Difference is about hearing and understanding other peoples’s wants and opinions. Not this pickup-artist-like bullshit.

[swiftcoder]

> but at the end of the day, I'm reshaping my speech to achieve a certain goal, rather than to convey facts.

The idea that the only goal of communication is to convey facts is (charitably) a pretty autistic view of interpersonal relationships.

There are many situations where conveying facts is not the primary goal, and there's a world of difference just in how facts are conveyed. Facts probably aren't going to stop your toddler screaming for ice cream. Telling your wife that dress makes her look fat likely isn't going to help either one of you. Calling out a coworker when they are wrong isn't going to improve your working relationship. And so on...

[digitaltrees]

Humans convey emotion and thoughts in conversation. We have mirror neurons that literally model an approximation of the internal mental state of the person you are talking to.

Facts won't stop a toddler crying for ice cream. But a clear unmoving boundary conveyed with love stops the intensity of their request and allowing them to have the sadness and anger at being told no and treating them with kindness and love even while they are expressing big feelings of disappointment creates a trusting, safe relationship.

[murkt]

I’ve genuinely read only Never Split the Difference from your list, and it’s kind of the opposite from manipulation.

The book teaches how to actually hear people even in the very emotionally charged situations, how to properly ask them questions to understand their point of view and their needs.

If I understand my son’s needs and can give him what he wants in exchange of him giving me what I want, how is that a manipulation? I can yell at him, impose sanctions (eg no minecraft for two days) and we both will be greatly dissatisfied. Or we can both get what we want, which is a win-win.

[Fantosism]

I think we're describing different halves of the same book.

I don't have a problem with generally understanding someone's needs. You ask what he wants, you say what you want, you both find a common middle ground.

But that's not what I'm worried about. He also teaches you things like give gifts to instill a sense of reciprocity. Use odd numbers so it appears as if you've put in research to arrive at this figure. "Bend reality" by moving around deadlines. Take advantage of cognitive biases like loss aversion.

Actual empathy is one thing, steering someone into thinking that your preferred outcome was their own idea is another. And that steering is precisely the manipulation I can't shake off. I'd be fine with the other person knowing I'm actually empathizing. But all those other techniques rely on the other person not noticing, which falls into my definition of manipulation.

[Imustaskforhelp]

I have read How to Win friends and Influence People and I haven't felt like its manipulation.

[I can be wrong and I usually am ;)] but the book teaches just some way to better re-phrase your best intentions and I have started to think the phrases in my head...

Just be honest with people is what that book taught me. I highly recommend people reading it.

Now I will be honest that reading the book itself isn't gonna give you something. It depends highly on variety of factors. For example, the book also teaches to listen more often and I genuinely try to do it as well but I sometimes fail to do that as I am a bit expressive/talkative

I think it also depends on who you are and how the book reinforces some particular topics. You dont have to completely do everything the book says to have meaningful impact as then it would feel manipulative to other person, yea.

And at the very least, reading this books makes you aware of some logic behind what he's saying (for example. I speak a lot but I should listen more, because people like me are so many and everyone likes to speak and be heard but people who actually listen are rare)

and then I can realize that I am speaking too much and so I think that I am more aware.

More Awareness of a topic doesn't mean complete and utter mastery of it but long term persistence of that awareness helps out meaningfully.

TLDR: Just be yourself and see if something sticks from the books and to implement it slowly and the way you like. There isn't one perfect way (not one even in the books) to living life. At best, its collection of what other successful people are doing. I wouldn't suggest (completely) living off the books because you have your own life and way of living it and you should be honest about it to yourself as well.

[vincnetas]

Read AI summary what “Never Split the Difference” is about. And its a bit scary that you think its suitable for talking with kids. Its pure manipulation technique. If you need to do this to your its most likely you were unable to create a real connection with them before.

[murkt]

Please read the actual book, it’s kind of the opposite from manipulation. You can read more detailed answers in the near branch of comments.

[digitaltrees]

Thank you for proving Tim Ferris right and showing that AI actually degrades the knowledge adding a second order harm to human society.

The tactics themselves are morally neutral. They can be used to manipulate or elevate another person whose well being you are deeply committed to, the intention behind the tactics are what determines if it is manipulation or connection/persuasion.

[sanswork]

The self driven child was one I just finished 2 weeks ago that I really enjoyed and felt had a lot of good advice that ran counter to my natural tendencies.

The How to talk books(there are a few of them for different ages), no drama discipline.

Cal Newports books while not specifically about parenting have helped me with disconnecting more from my tech which has always been a challenge since it's my job and a part of a lot of my hobbies which has definitely led to being a better father.

[digitaltrees]

Thanks for the recs. I’ll check them out. I am reading “How to raise humans” right now. Not far enough in to have an opinion yet.

[sanswork]

No worries, I have "Outdoor kids in an indoor world" next that I'm really looking forward to since I struggle with being an indoor dad despite being the type of kid that would leave the house in the morning on my bike and be back at night and went camping every couple weekends. I'll have a look at yours.

[monknomo]

How to Talk so Kids Will Listen (and How to Listen so Kids Will Talk) is excellent

[DrewADesign]

Only hard facts change your perspective?

Lacking happiness or charisma or confidence or the ability to quit smoking or any other run-of-the-mill self-help topic isn’t caused by a lack of relevant data: it’s a matter of perspective. Often, the best way to push through the problem is getting the perspective of someone that’s thought about it more. Whether self help books are an effective medium for that is another topic, but if they’re not, lacking hard facts wouldn’t be the problem.

[jayers]

Self help usually doesn't teach you anything that is new. Usually they just repackage the same common sense that you've heard a million times before in a new way. That doesn't mean it is useless though, I have had my own life changed by several self help/business books.

Sometimes you just need someone to tell you common sense in the right way so that you actually listen to it.

[digitaltrees]

You don’t come out of the womb with common sense. And you don’t know all common sense possible.

[nephihaha]

What if you are raised in a toxic environment? Many are. The news media is also packaged in such a way as to cause fear, alarm and misery. Sometimes you have to break free of that. There is a lot of bad advice out there especially in the modern world.

[matwood]

> Do these books/seminars actually teach you something new about being married or a father, that you didn't know before?

Maybe you were born with all the knowledge necessary to be a good father/husband, but I certainly wasn’t. I imagine most people just have their parents to go off of, and we all know what a can of worms that can be.

[noufalibrahim]

I'd wager that most people have just their parents to go off of and a few recallibrate using their own experiences, learning, and introspecting about them. Those are the few to whom books and seminars are useful as sources.

I think, for a large number of people, self-help (especially the short form high intensity style content that influencers post is just "content" to "consume" - a form of cheap entertainment that's thrown out almost as soon as it's consumed. There's no enduring change. That takes time and an semi-innate desire to change. Then, all these things become sensible and useful.

I'm not a big fan of Ferris but I'm willing to bet that someone who sits down with one of his books and works through it slowly applying the lessons to his or her own life will see some kind of change as opposed to the typical person who just asks an LLM to summarise the book or a video about it and then decides that they've changed.

[digitaltrees]

Yes. I learned new techniques like: victim vs author perspective. wife and I did a training where she went first, learned the the technique (tell a story of a fight like you are the most sympathetic victim then tell it again like you were the author) and it immediately shifted both of our perspectives about a conflict we hadn’t been able to resolve for 6 months because she told both versions and immediately understood where I was coming from. I am personally grateful we both know that technique now.

[kqr]

I recently read Attia's Outlive which is about what sort of lifestyle makes one more resilient against diseases of old age.

I'm not in a position to verify more than a few of the factual claims made by the author (and a lot of it sounds like mumbo-jumbo), but it was persuasive enough to get me to exercise for health (instead of performance at a specific event) and my life has gotten much easier since I came to that realisation. Maybe I would have done so eventually without the book, but I'm glad the book sped the process up.

[lotsofpulp]

>it was persuasive enough to get me to exercise for health

Why was this one guy more persuasive than the recommendation of basically every medical organization in the world?

Also, his correspondence with Epstein is quite damning.

[kqr]

Mainly that the advice was more structured, maybe?

Note that I was exercising before, only I didn't do it for health. But I also didn't suffer from any obvious problems. What I got out of every medical organisation in the world then is "You're fine. Don't worry about it."

I was probably fine, but I'm even more fine now; I'm capable of doing more of the things I enjoy.

[lotsofpulp]

> What I got out of every medical organisation in the world then is "You're fine. Don't worry about it."

This is alien to me, because for at least 50 years now, heart disease and diabetes has been at the forefront of basically every developed country’s health problems, for which the only solution proposed by all health authorities has been to eat less and healthier, and to do cardiovascular exercise almost every day. Even from elementary school, I remember being taught in gym or health class that being active and exercising was necessary for long term health.

[Levitz]

I think there's a bit of a "marketing" failure happening in this context.

I've been exercising for most of my life, I'm the guy that has been going to the gym since forever to many of my acquaintances, and so they have often talked to me about how they want to start exercising or how they are doing etc.

Nobody, and I mean nobody has ever said anything like "I'm so happy to decrease my risk of diabetes". My father stopped smoking and started riding a bike, motivated by cardiovascular health, what actually makes him happy though is to be able to go up the stairs without breaking into a sweat.

Ask anyone in a gym why they exercise, they will talk about health, just not in the way doctors do. The stick of "You will die in 20 years rather than 35" pales in comparison of the carrot of "you will feel better basically all the time"

[eru]

> Do these books/seminars actually teach you something new about being married or a father, that you didn't know before? Like what?

I'm as skeptical as you are, but teaching you something you didn't know before ain't the only channel they could conceivable help through.

Eg reading their bible can help a devout christian, even though there's nothing in there they didn't already know.

[n4r9]

It's "learning how to..." rather than "learning that...". Good self-help books can provide a framework to understand how your own childhood development influences your current behaviours, and how you can work to change. I'm currently reading "Parenting from the Inside Out" which goes into both the psychology and neurology of the developing brain, and explains how insecure childhood attachment can propagate across generations. I have a mixture of dismissive/avoidant and anxious attachment thought patterns, and it's been helpful to put this into context by reflecting on my own childhood and where they might have come from. Those patterns gradually feel less like something I'm "stuck with" and more like something I can challenge and master.

[digitaltrees]

That's awesome personal insight. My next door neighbors are childhood psychologists and when my daughter was 18 months old I mentioned I was trying to be very intentional about creating secure attachment and the things I was doing to facilitate it. They said in a very supportive and amused tone "oh it's too late, the attachment window has closed by now" then after a long pause said "she is fine and clearly has secure attachment to you and her mom"

By I myself have done a lot of work to understand ways to shift attachment styles similar to yours.

[coliveira]

What I find funny is people saying in social media that they read dozens of books, and when you see what they're reading is mostly self-help volumes! If you read one or two of these books you already know what they'll say in 100s of others. It's very similar to religious books: the content is always the same, they just rearrange things so people will continue consuming more of the same ideas.

[TeMPOraL]

Knowledge has to come from somewhere. Not everyone has perfect parents to couch them on marriage and parenthood.

[groundzeros2015]

Yes. I think about a few framings from books all the time.

[Fr0styMatt88]

I mean I can see it. Books are just a way to transmit one’s thoughts and experiences to other people. So it’s no different to being exposed to someone with a different viewpoint. Common sense isn’t common or innate, it’s tribal knowledge.

There’s that XKCD about someone learning something new that was just thought to be something everyone knew.

Also you don’t know what you don’t know.

Agree though — coaching and persuasion are a huge part which is why I think a lot of these books seem ‘fluffy’ if all you’re wanting is a collection of facts.