Chewing on Stan Taylor's Black Book of Power - Masters of Reality

 

TLDR:

Stan argues that emotional manipulation is everywhere. While I agree, I find that he overplays a "them" conspiracy of sorts while underplaying the complexity of life itself. In the end, Stan uses the very tactics to build his movement that he seems to denigrate in order to manipulate his readers into action.

Marketing

Stan continues with the rhetoric that things are awful in America by indicating nationalistic behaviors such as our Pledge of Allegiance, the chemicals in our food, beauty fads, rewrites of history, and false claims disguised as science for the purpose of marketing--the food pyramid and breakfast as the most important meal of the day.

There doesn't appear to be a significant reason for noting these things beyond that of raising one's level of indignation. Stan is attempting to get our emotions up in order to use them. Each of these things seem bad in their own right, though some might require a little more thought before we're up in arms. Each item requires their own level of scrutiny. Even something like the Pledge of Allegiance can seem awful if one is not particularly patriotic, but if you're running a club, group, or nation, you want your people to be loyal. Who wouldn't? Try sewing division into any organization and see what happens. The pledge is a means of keeping the country whole and united. Whether or not it works or should do it is certainly up for debate, but trying to keep peace and order in a country is not the worst of goals unless, of course, your country is indeed up to no good. In our case, that may very well be true, but that doesn't make the pledge wrong, it makes the country's leadership wrong.

As for lies in marketing... yeah, I'm pretty fed up with it myself. But how are we going to stop it? I think that is a legitimate question worthy of consideration. For now, Stan used marketing hacks himself to sell this book. Unless the lies can be rid of with appropriate enforcement, then marketing must lie to get a piece of the pie. No one is going to buy someone's books or watch their videos or buy anything they produce if they show it honestly while everyone else around them shows a fairytale that people buy into. Unfortunately, marketing lies and tricks are often a gradient making enforcement challenging.

Above is an image of El Monterey's Beef & Been Green Chili Burrito as advertised versus reality. It's so vastly different I dare say it ought to be illegal. For more marketing tricks regarding food, check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k7PJoNAXkk 

Breakfast

Since Taylor goes a bit into breakfast with a conclusion that it was all a lie, I find it a worthy mention here as well. He begins with a logical fallacy similar to an appeal to nature. He said our ancestors 200,000 years ago didn't need breakfast, so why should we? He said Romans ate one meal a day and consider the idea of breakfast to be gluttony and that medieval Europeans also broke their fast midday. This form of argumentation is so easy to squash it literally makes my blood curl as much as using literally in a way that is figurative. That was hypocritical irony, in case you missed it. 

The thing is, the same argument he makes that we feed our kids breakfast because our parents fed us breakfast and that's the only reason we think it's necessary is the exact same argument you can use to debunk his appeal to nature. Our ancestors didn't have the ability to eat breakfast 200,000 years ago since they were nomadic and constantly hunting for food. So by the Roman and Medieval times, they just got used to not eating breakfast. That may or may not be true, but the other more obvious consideration is that our ancestors 200,000 years ago had an average lifespan around half of what we enjoy today. A significant part of that is advances in medication and hygiene, but this goes to show poor logic. Our ancestors 200,000 years ago didn't wash their hands or take antibiotics so why should we? 

Stan's logic against breakfast is flat out inexcusable. What evidence we do have suggests that a quality breakfast does have benefits and that a poor breakfast is worse than going without. But even this is hard to prove causally since it is generally frowned upon in scientific communities to starve children intentionally to provide a double-blind study of causation. Still, yes, Stan is right that it was a marketing ploy to claim breakfast is the most important meal of the day and humans can indeed go without breakfast just fine. Still again, it is indeed beneficial to start the day with a quality breakfast. So ditch the Lucky Charms and eat some eggs or else go without.

Therapy

Moving on from breakfast, Stan begins to attack doctors and therapy. Pointing at the large sums of money being made from medication, he concludes that therapists and doctors need us to be sick to keep them in business. He again appeals to the past as if that is some kind of measuring stick for the present. In a world where therapy is hard to obtain and doctors are low commodity and high demand, I'm going to say they don't need to have such a conspiratorial need to keep us down. They're turning people away. Their business would do just fine, and even better, if they actually healed people. Without some evidence of wrong-doing, I think it is an awful perspective to indict healthcare workers who quite likely went down that path to help people.

As for quality of care, there is likely a lot to be desired. Advancements are being made all the time and the world keeps creating new issues to be dealt with. The fact is, there are a lot of people with a lot of variables at play. And, unfortunately, it also comes down to the quality of the individual. Some people simply aren't cut out for the job and a lot of people get into it for reasons beyond their actual capacity.

Apart from the conspiratorial perspective, Stan is indeed correct regarding the ways we identify with our illnesses. It is indeed a problem that people use them as identities. Instead of seeing these ailments as something to overcome, they are taken as static aspects of our lives. Even worse is the victim mentality. It's so easy to see the world as cruel and unjust and decide it is just our lot in life and if only someone would save us. As Stan also points out: no one is coming to save you. And by making your perceived illness your identity, you are choosing a version of yourself that's awful to live with. Learn to identify with more positive things and you will find your life that much more fulfilling. Don't let your problems define you. Let your response to them define you.

Marriage

Stan explains that we have an 85% failure rate of marriage based on a 50% divorce rate and a 70% unhappy rate. These are typical pop statistics that I don't have much issue utilizing. He explains the historic intent in how women were essentially property being handed around from one man to another. This is certainly true, but I dare say the meaning behind it has certainly changed as women have begun obtaining more rights and equality. Just because something was true, does not mean it is still true. But yes, culturally, we do seem to love the idea of marriage and fairly well expect people to get married.

So why do we love marriage so much? And why does Stan bring it up? It seems rather out of place apart from yet more evidence of a broken world. He seems intent on making us unhappy with the way the world operates, but quite honestly, there's no reason to be up in arms about it. While he quotes the ceremony costing an average of $35,000, it absolutely doesn't need to be that. I was married in a backyard with a potluck. We all love the idea of having someone to be with and partner with in this crazy world. It makes sense. And while there is a high rate of failure, this isn't the fault of marriage, it's the fault of broken people who haven't properly matured. Marriage isn't the problem. 

While Stan seems to condemn marriage, he very explicitly states that stable relationships are important for children. He moves the goalpost of marriage to be explicitly the contractual binding for the sake of the government, but he was just ranting about failure rates. The failure rate has nothing to do with the governmental contract and neither does the cost of the ceremony. These are entirely unrelated things. He's simply drumming up reasons for us to be upset at the state of the world.

Algorithms

Stan abruptly moves on to algorithms and how we think our phones are listening to us. He seems to deny that they are and chocks it up to the algorithms being able to predict us better than we can predict ourselves based upon our habits and the habits of those we are friends with. I'm not buying or selling this point. Whether or not they listen is moot and yes, the algorithms are fairly insane based highly on selling our information. Before we get mad, however, we should consider what this really means: ads that might actually interest us versus ads we're not interested in. Either way we're getting ads. So do you want ads for diapers when you have no children or for feminine products when you're male? I'd rather get applicable ads. The only downside to applicable ads is I might fall victim to more marketing strategies and waste more money. But the answer there is to learn self control and intellectual discipline.

Fake News

The story of Nayirah, daughter of Kuwait's ambassador appears to be true--not the story she told, but the story regarding her elaborate lie to get the US to go to war. Whether or not the US under Bush Senior knew this was a lie is perhaps a different story. The US indeed had personnel aiding in her testimony and how to deliver it in order to appeal to voters. What we don't know (or at least I couldn't find) is that they knew it was false when they helped her deliver it. 

The story led to the Gulf War and indeed the US had reasons to want to engage. Without all the facts and motives, it is hard to make a final judgement. All that said, I think there is very little reason to believe we are not lied to regularly. I think this story is a rather interesting one and points to something we all already know: the government lies for their own "nefarious" purposes. Of course, how we define nefarious is perhaps a little more subjective. We see it as for oil or money perhaps, but we don't all know the geopolitical games. There are a vast number of reasons that we are not privy to that could make this the right or wrong choice. And that is why we should be electing intelligent leaders whose character we can trust. And that, of course, is a whole other topic. But in short, sure, politics and government is awful, but what to do about it besides complain is another question entirely.

Bananas

I'm going to skip this section. In short, more evidence to think things are corrupt higher up. I'll take it at face value.

History

Stan claims McGraw-Hill owns the history we tell our kids and that Texas in particular gets a different version of sorts. I'll believe it. But again, there's an untold assumption that we should be enraged by this. There are awful things that "should" be in our books according to Stan and yet they're not. I'm not sure where he decides what should or should not be basics taught to our kids and I don't know where I stand on that myself. But he's not having this conversation here--he's simply making an unspoken claim that there is malicious intent with the stories being chosen. He also points to "teach the controversy" with religion vs evolution as another point. I think this has more to do with the people themselves. When governing 340 million people, there are definitely things to be considered in how they will handle various topics.

Ultimately, it is a well-known fact that the victors write the history. And it should be obvious that things are cherry-picked. We can't cram the entirety of history into a few years of school. So then we must ask ourselves, why are we sharing the information, to what intent, and what will the outcry of the populace be? It's far more complicated than "this terrible thing happened and therefore should be in all of our children's history books and we should be enraged that it is not." Stan has been throwing out item after item attempting to rage bait his readers.

Movies

Some have agendas and some led to recruitment into the Air Force. Agendas are obvious and if the Air Force used one for recruiting, that seems fine to me. Movie producers speak with the Pentagon about what will get them in trouble? Sure, why not. Should any of this enrage me? I don't think so.

Government

More on government operations designed to enrage us. Media is corrupt, government is corrupt, etc. Sure. Agreed. 

Made to Feel

This is where I find a little meat in the chapter. Perhaps all the lead up was simply to proclaim that we're being manipulated in many ways, but this purpose was not clear. Or maybe he was attempting to make an example by first enraging us and then recognizing we fell for it. But now, he is referring to how we can see through the lies because lies are typically intended to create emotion. He shows how framing of news stories are intended to create certain emotions like "They're taking advantage of you!" is intended to create anger. Oddly, this is exactly what all those previous stories were doing: showing how we're taken advantage of.

He also concludes that they make us feel fear, disgust, pride, and shame. Absolutely. And this is indeed one of the larger problems in the world today. Personally, I think it is less about global conspiracy and more about marketing requirements. In order to move us, they must make us emotional. In order to win against their opponents, they must make us hate our opponents enough to rise against them. Oddly, that's very similar to what Stan is doing with this book. Since his target audience is made of those who need a kick in the pants to get into action, he makes an enemy out of life itself taking advantage of them to make us angry enough to fight back and take charge of our life. Could work.

Stan concludes with this exact message: take control. Don't let others and their fake news or ads dictate how you are going to feel. Stop, take a breath, think it through, and choose how you feel to get the results you need. Stop being manipulated by the multitude of lies. This is a very long chapter for a very simple conclusion, but the build-up of emotion leading to the conclusion is perhaps hypocritically the very thing the readers need. But do the ends justify the means? That is ever the eternal question of choice and mastery of manipulation tactics.

Chewing on Stan Taylor's Black Book of Power - The Walking Dead

 

The chapter opens with a statistically likely scenario for the average human today and describes what we all know as going through the motions but in somewhat darker, poetic terms. I like that it reveals the belief that many people have that recognizing the pattern and claiming to hate the pattern is somehow above it but their doing so and continuing the pattern is still indeed the pattern. I also like that it reveals how most of our opinions are not our own opinions but those of the culture around us infiltrating and making us think we are thinking. 

What is lacking, however, is comprehension of what else it could be. He's basically describing physics and life with a dark scoff. Some of it might be new to some while much of it will be rather understood already by many. The reader will be drawn to accept that they, too, understand all this, are disgusted by it, and love that it is being talked about. In so doing, we grow a shared bond of disgust with Stan while assuming the insulting tone is meant for the other plebes just as it is not meant for him. But let's stop and consider, what else could it be? 

Some of the routine we could ditch--absolutely. We don't need to check our messages first thing in the morning and feed stress directly into our face like breakfast. But small talk? Yeah, we all hate it, but what's the alternative? We can either ignore each other or turn every encounter into something deep. Ignoring is a sure-fire way to be disliked which will indeed have impact on your success. Trying to be deep with everyone is exhausting and the average person doesn't want that at all. The only direction I could imagine Stan to go is that we drop out of the rat race entirely, but I don't see that as a particularly viable option. All that said, I do believe it is important for people to realize just how much of who they are is not "scripted" or "programmed" as if necessarily intentional, but as a byproduct of the situations they've been a part of. 

The factory settings (or operating system) that Stan speaks of is a decent model to comprehend. He explains quite well how our minds are wired by our parents and culture and that most people had either an authoritarian childhood, a permissive childhood, or an inconsistent childhood. As he points out, most people had some combination or varying degrees of these. The tone of the descriptions, as with the rest of the book thus far, has been one of negative judgement against the world--or so I perceive it. I might dare say that much of it, however, is just a facet of life and varying tradeoffs. There's not a whole lot of perfection to be had in the world even for ourselves, and every particular scenario comes with its pros and cons. 

While the Authoritarian OS might lead us to be yes-men or else reject authority entirely, it might also create in us a devotion to hard work and ability to achieve our dreams even if bred of a fear of failure. We can eventually learn to tame the non-beneficial aspects and embrace the beneficial. Similar things can be said for the other operating systems as well and, of course, every person is indeed unique in how it affects them in particular. One person will rise to the challenge while another will shrink away. Anyone who has raised children knows this to be true.

Ultimately, it is good to comprehend what these upbringings have done to us and to learn how to overcome the various pitfalls. I'd say we should do so without an underlying tone of "someone did this to us," however, which seems to be a common theme throughout the book. This could be intentional as it plays on a victim mentality which is rampant in the world today. Playing to the victim mentality could simply be a means of engaging the reader to truly help them, but I'm still on the lookout to determine if the book is truly meant to help us or milk us like cattle.

The book further goes into detail regarding our generations and how when we were born can dictate many things about us. Most of these things are only true at large. When marketing, of course, that's all that really counts. If the average Millennial likes x, y, or z, Stan can write about all 3 and, much like horoscopes, we will quickly grab to y and ignore x and z if they do not fit. Human behavior generally dictates that we ignore the mismatches and latch on to the matches and create a bias just to make it fit. We love to belong which is why books (or dare I say movements) like this create an identity out of it. We read where we fit, ignore the rest, and proclaim, "Yes! This guy get me! This will be the one!" Funny enough, Stan explains this outright and then says you're wrong. It's a form of reverse psychology to make you believe you're different and show him wrong, and hey, if that gets you motivated, then it did its job.

Compliance Training

Stan explains the basis for our school structure and how it came from Napoleon. This is entirely accurate, though I don't know that it requires the negative assumptions behind it. He makes it sound bad with his particular judgement upon the reasoning, but I do think it's worth questioning what else it should have been. It's easy to throw bricks, but much harder to build a house. 

Imagine if you're running a country. You are responsible to keep the country safe, secure, fed, and happy. Is this going to happen if everyone is killing each other for kicks? No, of course not. So you make laws and enforce them. How well is it going to work if everyone is a fool with no clear direction on right or wrong and constantly get into fights? Not well, of course, so let's instantiate some structure. All the things we can point out as some nefarious plan can just as easily be the outcome (whether hairbrained or not) of someone attempting to solve a larger problem.

That said, there were definitely unethical activities then and still are now. It's just important to recognize that not everything is a conspiracy and even if we dislike how some things run, there may just not be any other options that anyone has yet invented. And all such solutions, as anything else, has side effects. Life is indeed complex and it continues to become even more so. So much of what I see in this section and chapter is an appeal to the part of the reader that is fed up with the system in order to derive followers. I am sincerely doubt that he will explain a better method of education, for example--he is simply tearing down the things for which we have a universal dislike without consideration of what else it could even be.

This method continues as Stan rails against our desires for careers and marriages and points to stories as programming that makes us crave it as some intentional beast to control us. Now, don't get me wrong, there are definitely pieces of media bent on controlling us, but a significant amount of it simply appeals to who and what we already are. It's a question of the chicken or the egg. Women were already treated like property from the caveman days, for example, and as such it was our programming already to desire fighting for them in tropes of princess rescue. The stories didn't make us see women as inferior, we already did and so we made movies that mirrored our beliefs. As beliefs change, so do the movies people make in hopes to change more beliefs. It's a cyclical pattern.

Much of this chapter refers to an ethereal "them." They want to control you. It feeds into our superstitious perceptions of an unknown entity to make us rise and fight. It's an emotional tactic. Now, whether or not it's intentional or if Stan simply believes all this himself and is attempting to share his perspective is beyond my knowledge. He might really see it this way. And honestly, there might be more truth than I know to some of it. It shouldn't be bought wholesale though without greater evidence. I believe most people are simply making the most of what they have and it results in the various shit we have to deal with.

Being Different

Everyone does want to be different because nobody wants to think they're irrelevant. It is an unfortunate aspect of existence for a self-aware creature such as most of us. It's why we turn to religion or books such as this that promise to unleash the power within us and who we were born to be. And yes, much like he says, all our attempts to be different are just other methods of being the same. And being truly different does indeed suck because the average human does not take kindly to differences. If, however, someone does something different in a way that people appreciate, people will begin to mimic it and a new trend is born.

It reads as another aspect of how life works dressed up as some revelation that we should rise against it despite there being no other options. True difference makes your life hell or creates a new group that takes away the uniqueness of that difference. Even now, if we all follow Stan's teachings, we are all now a sub-culture of Stanzians. What other way is there? He does conclude with "What you want is to be special within acceptable parameters. Different enough to matter, similar enough to connect." Ultimately, I see that as destroying everything he just talked about. In what way shall we be different enough to matter? Matter to who? I thought we weren't seeking approval of others. It all sounds revelatory, but I am not yet obtaining any substantive meat on what to do with any of it.

Work

Stan talks a lot about work and the dynamics of boss-pleasing and working with others. He again points it all out like it's evil, but there's still no substance on what to do with any of it. Yes, we please our bosses. No, that doesn't make us a shill. What else would we do? We want to survive so we need money to afford our needs and we therefore find ways to get the resources owned by others. Sometimes the best path to doing so is doing your due in the corporate world. The very bosses that hold you back will one day be filled with people like you as time moves on if you're up for it. Sure it's a big machine, but everyone relies on it running. What else is there? I assume the principles will simply make you more likely to become the next boss, but to keep the machine running. Let's not confuse that with success though. Some people will want it, others will not. This isn't the definition of success. 

Unless it's your passion, your job is your means to survival and our issues are generally elsewhere. We generally crave more money when we don't really need it. Most people simply need connection with others to be happy along with basic needs being met. People can live happily without 99% of the things we have in the US. Most of us are unhappy because we don't understand where happiness comes from. It's not from being the boss. It's not from getting out from under your boss. Such things are generally irrelevant. And for that reason, poking at the machine like it, itself, is the problem is quite likely missing the point.

Addiction

And this brings us to the next issue: addiction. As Stan points out, we get addicted to the dopamine hits of social media posts and various other things. This isn't because the illuminati is trying to control us, it's because businessmen will do what it takes to make money. If they find a way to keep you engaged and therefore increase their profits, they will do it. And us, being unaware of how it impacts us, will continue to do so happily unaware. What leader of a company doesn't try to find ways to market? If you think marketing is unethical, then you never should have bought the book. But without marketing, how would you ever have found the book? 

Stan denounces the beast of marketing and human data collections while relying entirely upon it to sell his book. The ethics behind that are yours to decide. Those against slavery often also owned slaves. Those who built cars also rode horses. It takes time to make changes and we have to use the systems that exist. The only difference I see here, however, is it doesn't seem like Stan has another option, he's simply saying it's bad and they're all out to get you while literally doing all the same things. He's not wrong about the addictions. It affects us deeply and too many are unaware and have no idea how to avoid it. And it is indeed destroying the minds of our populace.

My thoughts concluding this chapter: "They" are not programming you. "They" are making choices to generate revenue just like Stan and everyone else in the world. And we, being unaware of the tactics, get sucked in on emotional highs. We can call foul all we want, but it won't change unless people change their priorities from making money to something else. What IS that something else? This is the question needing answered and the next is HOW to make it desired? It will probably be through media, marketing, and programming! Or, perhaps even more likely, through demonstration of a better way and sharing that way locally.

Chewing on Stan Taylor's Black Book of Power - The Beginning

 

Disclaimer: The intent of my musings is two fold. Firstly, I wish to document my own perspectives as I read the book and to see how they change over time. I fully well expect to find challenging insights, but I also fully well expect to begin with a lot of questioning of Stan's perspectives, motives, and full comprehension of reality. Secondly, while my questioning is not to indict, ridicule, or proclaim, I do expect that I will begin to shape an overall opinion as I progress. Suspicions will eventually prove right or wrong. But ultimately, I am simply reasoning out loud for anyone who wishes to follow along in this journey.

Since the purpose of this book seems to be heavily in regard to improving one's own mind and method of operation, I shall start by explaining where I am at to begin with. To start, I have no desire for power except in where I could use it to benefit the world. I don't need more things and I am already quite successful by the standards of many including my own. Defining success, however, is perhaps challenging. Most items of success have diminishing returns. Money is necessary and I have enough to call it successful. Having more would not make me more successful at this point from my own perspective. Having more could, however, enable me to be more successful in other ways. My main objective right now is to simply enjoy life and raise humanity higher than what it is--to leave it better off for my having been here. How to do either often eludes me since I tend not to take joy in the same things others take joy in and I cannot find a method in which to improve the world apart from small and local endeavors in hopes that they grow larger. Even if I had a larger stage, the world as it sits is someone else's playground. I have no power there and I would refuse to do what it takes to seize it. I have a strong sense of ethics which I am sure this book is bound to rub up against.

Preface:

Stan begins his preface with a marketing story. To water it down to a fine point, he explains how he helped the owner of a healthcare firm manipulate people into joining the team and believing it was their purpose or destiny. He explained they'd be loyal to their own detriment of lower pay than they're worth and do anything to defend the system exploiting them by making it their identity. What is interesting, is that Stan does not disavow this as unethical and seems to be the exact same thing he is doing with the purchasers of his book. But we shall see. Perhaps this is only to set the stage of understanding the puppetry to become inoculated ourselves and to use it for good, but I do believe the intent is for ethics be damned. His ads often seem to indicate that kindness is merely a puppeteers tool which I vehemently disagree with at this time. There may be some validity in the idea of not allowing kindness to rule our decisions, however, and this is something I need to work on myself. There is a difference between kindness and self-detrimental passivity. There is further difference in being an ass to get your way just because you can. And even if that works in the short term, I believe it will ultimately fail in the long term.

Part 1:

Stan begins by describing his readers (aka his target market). They are those who are drawn toward books and seminars that promise exactly what he is essentially promising: this will fix you. By mentioning how all the previous ones have failed, he makes a rather stark promise that this time will be different. Of course, that's always what we think when we start a new trendy method. Will his method work? Well, just as he states, it will depend mostly on you. It will work for some and not for others. Because in the end, it comes down to whether or not you're willing and able. He makes that fairly clear and I agree. Many are addicted to the identity of trying, but even this can and will become an identity for many. He is orchestrating it and allowing it, but perhaps out of necessity for marketing.

He then holds up many mirrors (or provides descriptions) of various behavior types he believes will make up his market. They will indeed match many of his readers much like a horoscope will. This provides a perspective for the reader that he is insightful and that this book is definitely the one they need. He's got their number, after all. But of course, this is just good writing and authority tactics. There is no other way to reach you unless you're already awakened to such tools. But then he goes on to use language like "the person you were born to be." This is a Tony Robbin's style hype to provide emotional engagement. He got my number, he promises more, and this could be it. I was born to be something greater! That is always the promise. And for every reader, there is always a potential. It really does come down to you. And he makes that fairly clear: "rattling the bars of the cage you helped build." It is true. We are our own worst enemies.

Stan encourages that we stop simply gathering data about how to move forward and actually take action to do so. Given that everyone is at different stages in their development, this is perhaps risky advice. Some people indeed need the kick in the pants and that's what this book serves as. If this is someone's first dive into introspection and self-improvement, however, this could be very damaging. Some insight is indeed necessary before we jump headlong into stupid decisions just to feel empowered. As most things, there is a balance to be had. That balance does not fit into the archetype or persona of Stan and would ruin the feel of the book. He is specifically targeting the people who keep trying and never do anything. The people who need the kick. If you need to be kicked, I think he does a decent job of using a form of reverse psychology to help you get past your "parasite" voice as he refers to it.

Moving on, he refers to this book as a covenant to be made. If you're not ready for the covenant, then get rid of the book. This seems fine to me as it's all a part of the psychology to kick you in the pants. It also doubles as identity, however, which is great for him, is a great motivator to start with for you, but does have the downside of potential manipulation in the future.

The book promises 3 aspects: to understand your programming, the provide you the insight to manipulate others, and to ultimately create your reality with this newfound power. My guess is that Stan has not yet achieved this but that this book is the beginning to doing exactly that for himself--just like all other motivational speakers. This is risky then as quite often our only proof that these people know what they're talking about is the very fact that they manipulated us into making them rich. There is no evidence that it works in other fields. Will any of this work in engineering? It is unclear. 

In short, Stan is telling his readers to take control and stop whining. So far, it is unclear whether that offer of control is truly our own or just another illusion he’s sold us.

Is the Black Book of Power by Stan Taylor a Scam?

When this book came across my Facebook feed, I was naturally rather curious. I'm a sucker for psychology and philosophy which, of course, Facebook knows. I was dismayed at my inability to find it on Audible or Spotify which took me to the ad link www.StanTaylor.com. Immediately, my scam alert bells started to ring when I saw the prices. (note: the alerts are not conclusions but warnings of caution)

The book has many ads that appeal to those who'd wish to manipulate others. And if you want to learn that skill, I have no doubt that Stan Taylor at least knows how to employ such tactics and I imagine some of them are discussed later in the book. The pricing here shows one tactic already in full swing which he may or may not divulge later. We shall see. This tactic is known as anchoring. He sets a high price such as $500 which is entirely arbitrary. As far as I can tell, he never actually set the price that high and this is the first launch of the campaign. Anchoring is a well-known tactic in marketing whereby one is drawn to believe they are getting a deal by comparing to the anchor. Wow, only $97 instead of the $500? What a steal! But when is a regular book ever that expensive? He does provide his own thoughts on the matter which I will discuss later.

Now, I would like to make it very clear at this point, I am not judging the tactics nor using them to conclude anything. In fact, I think the book likely has a lot of decent value in it and many will find it useful. So far, I find the book to be scratching a particular itch and I would indeed recommend it to people for what I have read so far if it weren't so damn expensive. But I've only just begun my adventure down this rabbit hole and I am leery of where it will lead. I do not believe this is a scam, per se but I do believe it is important to weigh the pros and cons accordingly--to know what is going on and what you are paying for.

Apart from the high price which Stan unabashedly excuses, there are other marketing tactics in effect. Firstly, who the heck is Stan Taylor? The name is most assuredly a pseudonym or a pen name as a search yields no results. That is fine and all, but there is a marketing secret embedded within it. He chose a unique enough name but common enough and simple enough that it stands out and is easy to remember: Stan. No baggage, simple, friendly. The second name, Taylor, comes with a slew of positive subconscious perceptions. Taylor Swift is hugely popular and Taylor will evoke those feelings subconsciously to those who associate with the music. It is also a common and easy name to feel comfortable with. All marketing. And that's fine--marketing is critical to a campaign such as this especially because he chose to self-publish and not even use any self-publishing tools. He'd be a fool not to use all the marketing tactics at his disposal. But rest assured, you are indeed being manipulated to buy the book. Hopefully the book plans to reveal that as it promises to awaken us to such strings.

Another marketing tactic is the extra "gift" and the limited time offer. You wouldn't want to miss out, so buy now! There is a significant chance this will never change unless, for a limited time, he makes it seem like it is no longer available just so he can move on to the next sale. It's called manufactured scarcity paired with anchoring to justify inflation. It's like Kohls. Everything is always 80% off. All marketing. 

Now, there are some other more shady marketing tools that I believe are being employed but which I cannot prove (which is why they work). The first is claiming that 60,000 people have read this book. Who the hell are they? It's unverifiable and quite unlikely when there is no mention of him or his book anywhere to be found as of this launch. It sounds shady to me and this tactic is called social proof inflation. By assuming there are that many people who put the money down on such a book, there must be value! It can't be that risky. There are many reviews which also seem entirely fictional. They are too well articulated and, quite honestly, sound a lot like his own writing style. The review by "GatsbyGotWrecked" in particular sounds exactly like Taylor reviewing his own book. Unsurprisingly, he has only 2 other reviews written 2 and 3 days prior to his own review and they were negative reviews on two books of a similar genre. 

The comments on Facebook ads also appear quite planted, and for having 60,000 people who supposedly read this book, the exclusive Facebook group seems a bit shy with only 250 people as of this writing. But hey, these are just notes and may have excusable reasons for any of them. I just think it's far more likely to be the very marketing he clearly knows how to utilize.

Lastly, Stan isn’t just selling a book--he’s selling an identity. The high price creates what’s known as cognitive dissonant justification: your brain needs to believe the cost was worth it. You can’t see yourself as a fool, so the book must be life-changing. And for it to be life-changing, it has to become part of you. You’re no longer just a reader, you’re a... Stan...zian. You have to be. The alternative is admitting you paid over $100 for a $20 book.

Every ad, image, description, tone, and verbiage is directly calculated to sell you his book and to make you a disciple. But again, of course it is. How else would he sell it? And the fact he's so good at it means he does indeed know just how to do what he promises: make anyone trust him and follow him. Now, is he really going to share it with you? Or is it entirely used against you? That is what I am here to find out as I dive deeper into the content of his book. Given the cost, he certainly is not doing charity work. He is a business man through and through. But hey, that doesn't mean there isn't value. 

And so, I have paid the cost so that I can provide an honest look at whether or not the value truly exists or if his followers are mere puppets on his strings chasing the next shiny self-help book--oddly enough, he recognizes this as his main audience in chapter 1. So my initial suspicion is that he fills a niche of self-help for the type of people who have a craving for strong authority figures promising control--a darker Tony Robbins in a way perhaps geared to my exact 40s demographic. But again, we shall see.

Fountain of Youth 2025-10-10

Today's questions or topics that I'd like to be answered:

1. Alignment is hard. I don't want to give up, but I struggle with next steps. Too many options, too much confusion.

I got the impression I should stop attempting my sessions while sitting at a computer. The ambient noises in the area were very droney and putting me in a bad sense. Plus, I'm treating the experience like some documentary rather than experiencing it. 

I put out there a password so to say so that if I am reaching the spirit world and so is another person, maybe they'd hear it? The voices in my head tried to make me all important about it like the world will be looking for me and venerating me. How vain. And childish. In the very next breath I'm crying out to know if I'm wise or learned yet I'm constantly fumbling around like a baby crying out for support. And yet, to me, it makes perfect sense.

I see so much out there that seems unrealistic. Clearly people will believe anything. And I spent decades of pondering and being rejected all these years. So clearly I'm ahead of my time. And then yet, perhaps I'm only just now catching up with all the things I thought were weird but were simply false judgements? But then I'm right back to square one. How can I ever know? Am I wise or a fool? Am I reaching beyond with a greater mission to save the world in a way few can grasp? Or am I one of thousands and need to focus more on myself?

I also got the self-important perspective that the world is literally a reflection of my own mental state. Could be. Seems just as conflicted. So how will I know what's truth? Halloween I will go to a psychic who is presumably far more capable than I. If that is true, then she will know my passphrase and speak to me clearly what's up and I can believe her. If not, well, I could be self-important because obviously this isn't working and everyone is playing along like it does. So I feel like a lot rests on that night. Truth with direction or a greater divide between self importance and insanity with me dangling in the middle?

The Fountain of Youth 2025-07-11

Today's lesson was all about maturity. We as a species have failed to continue maturing. A few people here and there may have figured it out and it seems we've received ancient wisdom to guide us toward it, but we've come to neglect or forget what maturity is, what it means, and why we should do it.

Inside our minds is like Lord of the Flies on a ship. No one's at the helm for none of the kids know where to go. They jump around the ship fighting each other and making noise. They take turns jumping on the wheel only to be thrown off by another kid shortly thereafter. The wise kids don't bother even taking the helm cuz they don't know where they're going either and it makes no sense to try to steer a ship when others will fight you for the privilege.

Maturity has so many aspects and it seems so hard without clear directives and clear understandings as to how it benefits us. We have to tell our children that we don't hit each other, we don't call names, we try to work in harmony as a family. Then once we're an adult, most of us stop hitting but forget the rest. Why try to work in harmony when no one else is? They started it. They're they bad guy. Such children... We scream, we fight, we war. We don't know how to behave. And anyone shouting out that we ought to behave is generally killed. It's a rough world.

Still, perhaps we've been learning it fairly slowly as a species. I'm can't say we're regressing while the whole world continues to improve, but we're definitely always on the edge teetering toward destruction over growth with each new development and advancement giving us reason to take our eyes off the prize of maturity. 

To the immature, maturity looks weak. It looks passive. It looks like permission for monsters to run amok. And so, we trade in maturity for loud voices and warriors. People who will get things done and not just sit around singing kumbaya while the world burns. Unfortunately, this is just so short-sighted. The real power comes with the maturity. The maturity is alignment with the River. And alignment with the River is the path that heals the world either through scientific principals or even via stream magic. But we'll never know if we don't work toward it--something few people care to do.

I found myself wanting to steer the ship. I want to be strong enough to fend the fools off the help and to keep it steering in the right direction. But it takes knowledge, discipline, strength, and purpose. And who is going to teach me all those things? Feeling compassion for this would-be captain, I raised my hand to say, "I will. I will train him" while forgetting the him was me. And that's just it, we must take ownership of our own maturing. No one else is going to do it. Just us. And we will do so by following the voice of the River.

I was presented with a choice of maturity. I was put in charge of my own timeline. When do I think I should mature? When am I ready for it? I am still much like a child, so I want to make the childish decision. But that's the decision that keeps me the child. Am I not strong enough to mature? Am I going to admit I am beneath it? To admit I am incapable, or never going to be ready is to say I never want the greater things that maturity brings. I don't want greater knowledge and power. I don't want a life of greater peace and satisfaction. But don't I? And is it really out of my reach? So when do I want to grow? When will I be ready? When will I say this is the time, I am ready to grow? When indeed...

Aided meditation is for the babies. The mature reach the River and hear it of their own accord. The wise learn to breathe in the material world slowly and exhale emotions of virtue into the world around them. And in so practicing and meditating, they learn to hear, learn to see, and learn to guide the River in and around their presence with full faculty of mind.

The Fountain of Youth 2025-06-28

I started a little concerned as most travels are concerning when you're not aware of the destination. But you don't just "arrive" at your destination. So it's not scary. You move toward it. You see it coming and to some degree you can turn around, but it's really best not to fight the current, honestly. But I could cater which current I was on, of course, using Enya. I didn't realize she had so many foreboding songs but each one seemed perfectly fit for my travels. I faced scenarios in my mind of a sort that kind of made me know things about me that I "knew" but never really put to words or believed. Like, I didn't know so strongly before now that I am not content with being content when there are other people suffering. Like, I "knew" this, but that is literally just a PART of who I am. That's kind of inspiring actually. I like that about me. And further, I'm not fine with just a lack of suffering for all of life. Like, how boring. I value creativity so much. All kinds. That is so ME. And I will never ever ever just pick a little hut of beliefs to avoid the rabble on the streets. Never. Can't do it. I will fight the rabble and die trying. No huts for me. That's admirable at least in my own eyes. I love that about me. All these things about me that I like so much. All the while I'm learning this, when I finally laid down to take the travels in, I felt like an arrow of love had pierced my heart. Not just metaphorically, but like, I literally felt my chest just pouring out and overflowing with love mostly because I didn't even know what to do with it. I had never tasted it. My body was so overwhelmed I just kept laughing in confusion. What is this feeling?? I reveled in it, I reveled in the revelations of what I love about myself, and one of those things that I love forced me to get up and think about all this and write it all down in the hopes it can help other people and not just enjoy it for myself and forget it.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot the annoying revelation about me. I find it nearly impossible to just enjoy something. I have to know more. I have to analyze. I have to ponder the cosmic significance however remote the chance.