The Perception Principle (Part 2)


This is the sequel to an article I wrote a few months back titled, The Perception Principle.

Here's an excerpt from that article:

"Many cognitive psychologists believe that, as we experience things in this wonderful world of ours, we create a mental picture of how the world works.

In other words, while we may sense the objective world, our sensations map to percepts, and these percepts are largely provisional, in the same sense that scientific hypotheses are provisional.

In layman's terms, perception is reality folks. We may not have a shred of proof to back up our beliefs. But if we perceive something to be true...well, then it is."

Here's are a few of my favorite quotes about perception:

"No two people see the external world in exactly the same way. To every separate person a thing is what he thinks it is --in other words, not a thing, but a think." - Penelope Fitzgerald

"The difference between a mountain and a molehill is your perspective." - Al Neuharth

"The heart has eyes which the brain knows nothing of." - Charles H. Perkhurst

Let me give you a few examples of The Perception Principle in action:

Lance Armstrong is in the final stage of the Tour de France. The perception is, Armstrong's going to win the race because he's done it so many times before.

Michael Jordan has the ball with a chance to take the last shot, with the NBA championship hanging in the balance. The perception is, Jordan's going to make the shot, because he's done it so many times before.

Roger Federer is serving for the match in yet another Grand Slam tennis championship. The perception is, Federer's going to win, because he's done it so many times before.

Tiger Woods has the lead heading into the final round of a major championship. The perception is, Woods' is going to win, because he's done it so many times before.

Perception is a powerful, powerful phenomenon. It really is.

For instance, you may not have a dollar in your bank account, but if you have an amazing website, the perception is, you must be successful.

That's why how you package yourself is so important. It really can make the difference between success and failure.

Do you want to be successful?

Then start packaging yourself for success.

Take the time to build a great website...write and distribute a bunch of articles that position you as an expert...develop superior knowledge in your chosen field...actively participate in discussion forums.

In other words, stand up and be noticed.

Hang your shingle out there for the whole world to see.

If you do this and do it correctly, something magical is going to happen.

People who didn't even know who you were just a few short months ago, will suddenly be willing to pay you thousands and thousands of dollars to help them solve their problems.

...And that, my friend is real!


Dale King is the owner of the new Internet marketing website, Guruknowledge.org

Hi, Dale

thank you for these Informations.

I agree about the perception, but with your permission, I am realy to ask about:

how could a bunch of articles position someone as an expert?

perhaps it help to get traffic, and be more visiblity on the web.

but how it help in giving the vision of "EXPERT" in reader eyes?

I think modestely that it will be a healthy debate if we try to go deeper, in the relation about:

written and social status.

what do you think about?

again, thank you and hope to get more details about that.

Hello Abdellah:

It's all about perception (no pun intended).

Let me explain.

People who write articles, books, white papers, even blogs are for the most part perceived to be authorities or experts in their particular fields - providing the topics they write about provides good, helpful and accurate information.

Dale King

Or just people trying to drive up their SEO rankings. When people write tons of articles with little or no content, all they do is annoy people with their blog or forum spam.

No one considers these people authorities.

hello Dale.

I agree that the quality of the content stand as an argument.

the reader begin by the content, then ask the basic question :

who wrote this?

the important partie of an article or book or even a forum post, is what is related to the other, reader enjoy to know who write what they are reading.

in the case of an article or a forum post, this can be found in the signature or in the partie called "about the author".

the background of the individual is what (and it is not common) stand as an argument for qualifying some one as an expert.

the background may be academic, or even professionnal experience.

no one can be or percieved as an expert without such signature, and such background.

people beeing more and more septic they tend to not believe in diploma, beeing flooded by spam inciting them to buy diploma they stop to believe in diploma and try to verify their authenticity.

so people turn to professional experiance as argument of their status, and end to use individula testimonial to make strong their position.

so time is worst, no one is an expert in a field if their is not "others" to attest his knowledg.

finaly this is my vision and I may be wrong.

Abdellah:

We all choose our own gurus...our own mentors...our own experts..our own authorities, based on our own criteria.

While you may admire and respect a certain individual, I might not share the same adulation for that person.

For example, you might have a favorite singer.

However, I might not care for that particular singer.

But just because I don't like that particular singer, doesn't make them any less qualified to be a singer.

It just means we have different likes and dislikes, that's all.

That's not necessarily a bad thing.

We're all different and we all like different things.

That's what makes the world go 'round!

Dale King

hi,Dale

singer don't write article.

I wasn't about appreciation, because appreciation is realy a personnal jugdement and it is attached to each person.

I was simply about how article can make some one an expert?

ofcourse when it is about apreciation I agree with you.

exemple, many have their doctors, even if if they have to chose between 2 doctors with the same diploma and experience they will chose theirs.

here it is just APRECIATION.

but how a bunch of article can make me an expert?

this is the question.

regarding authority and guru etc, beside the personnal appreciation there is a background that confirm and support the personnal appreciation.

I will never go ask my friend to suggest me a list of drug even if I appreciate him, because he isn't a doctor.

even if we appreciate a person, if he havn't the background and the qualifiaction we can't elevate him to the rang of expert.

doing the opposit may be dangerous.

Abdellah:

Simply writing a bunch of articles can't make anyone an expert, unless they have the background, expertise and experience to back up what they write...anymore than writing a book makes someone an expert, unless they've got the goods.

But back to the point of this thread.

In the final analysis, it really doesn't matter what you or I think about someone's credentials.

If others perceive a person to to be an expert because of their articles or their books, well, then that person's an expert.

"No two people see the external world in exactly the same way. To every separate person a thing is what he thinks it is --in other words, not a thing, but a think." - Penelope Fitzgerald


Dale King

Dale:

happy to read that you agree that the credential is an essential element in the process of perception.

without credential people dont elevate some one to the rang of expert.

if some one tell me X is an expert in a chosen field without given his credential, I will understand that he is just impressend.

I am to talk about the gaps between beeing impress and to believe (witch implay certitude to be certain) that it is.

people may be impressed but after a moment they want instinctively to assret their first impression, and the way to do that is to seach for certitude (credential).

I think modestely that credential are what make sure our first impression reading something or about our vision about some one.

to resume :

I think modestely that their is a part of rationnality in the process of perception, and that this part is the search of credential.


ps: I enjoy the quote thank you.

just wondering if perception makes something real, what happens in the case that you perceive something like roger federer winning tennis, or jordan making the last minute shot, and it doesnt actually happen.. it doesnt matter how much you perceive it to be true, because they didnt win...what now? what to do with perception?