Human Common Denominator
Jonathon Guyer
?? LinkedIn Top Voice ?? | ??? Host @ 'Easy to read Deep Thoughts' | Team USA ?? Boxing Coach | CEO @ Create Personal Equity
What is the common denominator for all humans? Don't answer yet. This is a deep one worth thinking about and the right answer doesn't bring the intuitive closer you're going to be looking for.
Similar to the perspective structure provided by the Socratic method of thinking, identifying a common denominator for all humans requires a structured method. I think in visuals and in this deepest of topics, describing with words is a catastrophic downgrade = no way around it.
Picture a bell curve (side to side) with a normal 12" ruler lying on its mean (up and down). This mental image functions like a 2D tool we're able to use in all sorts of complex philosophical 4D (Time = 4th dimension) situations.
The tool illustrates the variance and in this topic, our tool breaks the standard "all humans are human" perspective. We're not all the same, well simultaneously, we're all the same = paradox is in the level of depth and we solve this with our 12" ruler. Example: We are all the same at the top of the bell curve mean (macro) and completely different at the bottom (micro). Side-to-side illustrates probability and probability functions as all the variance we don't know (nobody will ever know).
Conclusion: What is the common denominator for all humans? Pick a spot on the metaphorical ruler. At the top, we're all humans. At the bottom, we're all individuals. Less detail = more commonalities. More detail = the less we have in common. Question any business describing it differently. Odds are they have skin in the game. Our competition tends to speak confidently in absolutes (all humans are human). Similar to looking at the horizon and then assuming the world is flat.
?? LinkedIn Top Voice ?? | ??? Host @ 'Easy to read Deep Thoughts' | Team USA ?? Boxing Coach | CEO @ Create Personal Equity
1 å¹´The "test" part of personality tests or the "assessment" of the ever-growing career assessments industry is fatally flawed. Specifically, testing doesn't work and it's crazy easy to prove Example: people are in different moods, at different times, on different days = tests captures a moment in time. Not who the person is at all times. We (CX measurements) use the DISC personality type framework only for it's structure. Tests or assessments not required in our novel, makes sense when you see it working process. Tests when used, create a counter intuitive risk. Example: what if people read the results and then actually believe it?