What does Steve Jobs "bend reality" mean?

Updated on : January 17, 2022 by Allen Vance



What does Steve Jobs "bend reality" mean?

Steve Jobs was often so excited about something, that anyone close to him was mesmerized by whatever it was he was showing. It wasn't until they were away from him that they could find something to disagree on. A good example of this was the hockey mouse on the original iMac.

This was called the reality distortion field.

But it was how excited he was. Just look at your keynotes. Even when he was seriously ill, in so much pain and discomfort, he would smile and laugh on stage. This was not an act. He really loved what he did. In his subsequent keynote addresses, there were doctors and hospital staff.

Keep reading

Steve Jobs was often so excited about something, that anyone close to him was mesmerized by whatever it was he was showing. It wasn't until they were away from him that they could find something to disagree on. A good example of this was the hockey mouse on the original iMac.

This was called the reality distortion field.

But it was how excited he was. Just look at your keynotes. Even when he was seriously ill, in so much pain and discomfort, he would smile and laugh on stage. This was not an act. He really loved what he did. In his subsequent keynotes, there were doctors and hospital staff behind the curtains ready to leap forward. I needed oxygen and other things between sets. Still he did this.

This was his enthusiasm

This was where Steve Jobs could basically convince anyone of anything.

It also defines who you are. Here's an example: If you're nervous when you speak in public, others will pick it up and your rough speaking ability will be the reality.

Steve Jobs learned to "bend reality" by seeing himself as a leader and twisting people's thoughts to convince them.

In short, reality shifting is the practice of shifting your awareness from your Current Reality (CR) to another reality, usually your Desired Reality (DR).

  • Simply put, you go to bed and wake up to a different reality, whether it's one where your hair is shorter and curly or longer and straighter. It can also be a completely different reality where your deceased mother is safe and sound, etc.

Can you die changing to another reality?

  • When you change to another reality, you do not die and you will not die in the reality that you left "behind", you are only changing your consciousness to another reality.
Keep reading

In short, reality shifting is the practice of shifting your awareness from your Current Reality (CR) to another reality, usually your Desired Reality (DR).

  • Simply put, you go to bed and wake up to a different reality, whether it's one where your hair is shorter and curly or longer and straighter. It can also be a completely different reality where your deceased mother is safe and sound, etc.

Can you die changing to another reality?

  • When you change to another reality, you do not die and will not die in the reality that you left "behind", you are only changing your consciousness to another reality, while you have already died in many other parallel realities, I do not recommend trying. die in the present while consciously changing them.

LET'S GO FROM THE DEFINITION SEEN IN THE URBAN DICTIONARY

change of reality

NOUN

  • 1. the manifestation of objects that appear, disappear, transform and are transported.
  • 2. changes in the way we experience time. 3. Any sudden and abrupt alteration of physical reality without apparent physical cause. 4. the source of synchronicity.

EXAMPLE

  • John discovered that his keys had undergone a reality shift.
    • He found them right where he had first looked at them when he noticed they were missing, in the same place where he knew for sure they hadn't been, just a moment b

5 steps to change your reality

5 steps to change your reality | HuffPost

For curious students: the link mentioned above for more information on the subject

Blessings and best wishes

P.S.

The human mind (for most humans) enjoys the "reality shift."

  • Many believe - 'that the other side is always green' (They believe that reality is always on the other side ')
    • Because of this, they never live in the 'stream' and never understand
      • 'the power of Now'

THANK YOU

So there is something concrete and scientific to say here.

Look around. You see some things: a table, trees, whatever.

Now those 'things' are indisputably * on your mind. It is not the "real world". It is a mind generated image of the "real world", whatever it is! (Similarly, Magritte's image of a pipe is not a pipe.)

If there is a real world, it is hidden from us. We can infer some of the properties of that supposed real world by seeing how the image / image / rendering behaves. That 'image' contains all the colors, shapes and sounds that we normally freely interpret as 'the world'. (Note

Keep reading

So there is something concrete and scientific to say here.

Look around. You see some things: a table, trees, whatever.

Now those 'things' are indisputably * on your mind. It is not the "real world". It is a mind generated image of the "real world", whatever it is! (Similarly, Magritte's image of a pipe is not a pipe.)

If there is a real world, it is hidden from us. We can infer some of the properties of that supposed real world by seeing how the image / image / rendering behaves. That 'image' contains all the colors, shapes and sounds that we normally freely interpret as 'the world'. (Note that scientific apparatus such as particle colliders, microscopes and telescopes are also in the image / image. We cannot infer from an image of particle footprints in a particle collider that the particles exist 'as particles'. I am not speaking of QM / QFT wave-particle possibilities. I mean, the invisible reality could exist in a way that is parallel to what we see, as numbers, as pure order, as turtles and elves ...

If we choose to label the image - the things we see, hear and touch - as "reality", then could we say that "reality is an illusion"? A better response to calling the image 'reality' is to say, 'Don't do that! Notice that there is the image, that it is a real image, and perhaps there is something beyond the image! '.

The totality of reality seems to include the image / representation / image, and some kind of order that is re-presented in that image. We have no idea "how" (eg in what form) that order exists or is implemented. (This is why arguing about whether we are 'in a simulation' seems a bit silly. How can we know ?!)

It is an illusion, or better, simply a mistake, to interpret the image (the sensory virtual reality movie!) As the whole.

Now, why do I affirm that everything that is, or can be, "concrete and scientific"?

In science (especially physics) we have words like "electron", "quark", etc., which are supposed to label definite "things". (I'm using things in a bit of a non-standard way here, because an electron could be a purely mathematical construction, for example, under informational realism.)

The question is, when I experimentally see 'a table', am I directly seeing a collection of quarks and electrons? We can do a simple experiment to show that the table-as-shapes-and-colors is not the table-as-collection-of-quarks-and-electrons-and-other-things that is studied in physics. The experiment? Just squint your eyes! You get two tables as shapes and colors, which violates all sorts of conservation laws, if the table as shape were identical to the collection of quarks, electrons, etc.

If you're going to follow other tips here and read a lot of philosophers from hundreds of years ago (which is very helpful sometimes), add this simple integration of science with philosophy. There is an epistemic veil, and mainstream science ** explains only things on the other side of that veil.

This is really very important. Currently, science does not address these problems explicitly or rigorously. That failure is one of the loopholes that makes science vulnerable to "post-Truth" attacks.

We can fix this loophole. But it will take a real science of consciousness to do it ...

** 'Conventional science': physics, chemistry and biology, excluding theories of conscious experience. Theories of conscious experience explicitly relate the invisible reality 'on the other side of the veil' to the image / image / representation, also known as conscious experience.

* 'Hands down' - people still argue about it! (Mainly philosophers. See this book for the 2018 debate: Direct Realism vs. Indirect Realism: A Neurophilosophical Debate on Consciousness.) It is possible to construct complex theories in which experience is the same as 'the real world'. But it is not possible to integrate them with current science. More specifically, integration requires a massive elaboration of physics and biology. That does not mean "direct realism", the idea that we see "the real world" directly, is incorrect. However, it is not easy to see what the currently productive value of direct realism is.

POSTSCRIPT: This answer answers the question by analyzing and contextualizing the dominant scientific worldview in relation to a deeper reality. For an orthogonal and complementary answer, perhaps pointing to a potential ability to inquire into reality itself, as a whole, see Jeffrey Werbock's answer.

Everyone has this so-called field, only up to a point. When you really believe in something with every inch of fiber in your body and you really want someone to follow you, you can usually do so. It may not work all the time, some just have more than most.

Steve was an extremely passionate man. He didn't have a bad mood or even a bad temper, that would be like calling a hurricane a gust of wind, not only was he happy, not only was he having a good day, no, he had an amazing day, he accomplished something unheard of, even if it was only 2 minutes faster to work today than yesterday. When i loved

Keep reading

Everyone has this so-called field, only up to a point. When you really believe in something with every inch of fiber in your body and you really want someone to follow you, you can usually do so. It may not work all the time, some just have more than most.

Steve was an extremely passionate man. He didn't have a bad mood or even a bad temper, that would be like calling a hurricane a gust of wind, not only was he happy, not only was he having a good day, no, he had an amazing day, he accomplished something unheard of, even if it was only 2 minutes faster to work today than yesterday. When he loved something, he really looked up to it, almost with the skill of a child. That thing was truly the best thing he had ever seen, touched and felt in his life, and it really did feel like that.

I've met people like that. They can make you, at least momentarily, believe what they want you to believe. Have you ever known a house to house vacuum cleaner? Like Rainbow sellers? I have. I really thought I was missing out on something in my life and living dangerously by not having one, just after an hour or two after she left, I thought no, I didn't need a vacuum that I couldn't afford.

When Steve Jobs went to Andy Hertzfeld and told him he had to make the first Mac boot 5 seconds faster because it saved lives. Given how many people will own a mac for 5 seconds, that's 30 lives. Andy assured Steve that pretty much everything was written in tight assembly code, things just couldn't go any faster. Well lo and behold, they got the Mac to boot up faster, more than the 5 seconds Steve asked for. His passion for the cause was so great that it infected Andy and the others and I'm pretty sure they investigated it and gave it more time than it deserved and fixed it.

When you have someone who really feels for the cause, it is almost a childish affection, it catches you, add to this, well above normal intelligence and you have someone who can make you stop selling sugar water and change the world.

Honest intellect and feelings. Steve couldn't sell you the Motorola Rockr iTunes phone even if his life depended on it. Just watch the video on youtube. You get the feeling that this phone is complete shit, he can't sell it, actually all his behavior is such that the phone is disgusting shit, and he is on stage in front of over 5000 people.

I couldn't really sell you anything, but when I wanted to sell you something, or make you feel like shit, I had no problem doing it. He was changing the world, I was on the way or you were helping the cause.

Many people have this gift, many celebrities, religious leaders, singers, and politicians. This can be trained and refined, but you have to believe that once you really believe you have this effect, the more you do it, the stronger it becomes.

Pablo Picasso is widely quoted for saying that "good artists borrow, great artists steal."

Steve Jobs saw this and gave his paraphrased version, "Good artists copy, great artists steal."

Which one do people remember the most?

Of course, people might think this was all Steve's because they probably never heard of Picasso, and this is what Steve got really good at: stealing ideas.

He was a low-level technician while working for Atari and was known for not knowing much about coding. For that, he would pass the job on to his good friend Steve Wozniak, who was the creation behind the v

Keep reading

Pablo Picasso is widely quoted for saying that "good artists borrow, great artists steal."

Steve Jobs saw this and gave his paraphrased version, "Good artists copy, great artists steal."

Which one do people remember the most?

Of course, people might think this was all Steve's because they probably never heard of Picasso, and this is what Steve got really good at: stealing ideas.

He was a low-level technician while working for Atari and was known for not knowing much about coding. For that, he would pass the job on to his good friend Steve Wozniak, who was the creation of the first Apple Mac.

Jobs saw his talent for getting people to do things for him, which I think everyone can definitely agree on.

Jobs also had a love affair with Japan and was infatuated with Sony and all the inventions, products and prototypes he saw there. This was probably the source of his inspiration and where he began his visions of Apple doing the same.

Now, having a vision and knowing how to implement it are two very different things. For the most part, Jobs was often wrong about a lot of things.

Like the first iphone:

Jobs was adamant about sticking with the click wheel design for the iPhone, but engineers suggested that a touchscreen was clearly the direction his competitors were heading and that they should be using it too. In the end, Jobs gave in to the touchscreen iPhone. This reveals his stubbornness to hang on to past successes rather than innovate or invent something new because he simply did not know the limits and potential of technologies.

Like when the first iPod came out, it was 1.9 cm thick. Jobs did what anyone would have suggested: make it smaller. That's not really a cool suggestion, but his persistence with his engineers to make things smaller or thinner made him seem like something of a tech whiz.

So no, he wasn't able to invent anything, nor was he a marketing genius.

As I mentioned earlier, he was great at getting talented people to do impossible things for him despite having no idea how to get them there.

Edit:

"The job theft quote was about drawing inspiration from things in nature, etc., not literally stealing someone else's work."

Jobs didn't have strong engineering skills (and Woz revealed this), so the only way forward for Apple was to really steal ideas.

Many of the features that ended up on the Apple Lisa came from Xerox, but even a genius like Woz couldn't figure out how they did it. So how did they do it? They had to buy the licenses from Xerox that provided all the blueprints, all they had to do was plug it in and play it on Lisa to use it. This is how Gates was also able to create Windows, he also had to learn through Xerox licenses.

It depends. Are you talking about hospital rehab? 28-day standard hospital rehab? If so, then no. That is not the point of a 1 month withdrawal. The purpose of a place like that is to help you learn how to abstain from using drugs in a safe environment and to help you START your journey to a clean lifestyle. It does not help you at all to deal with the reality of living clean in the real world, with stress, bills, work, children, relationships, etc.

A standard 28-day rehab helps you gain skills and tools to start working on yourself. It helps you get rid of everyday stress.

Keep reading

It depends. Are you talking about hospital rehab? 28-day standard hospital rehab? If so, then no. That is not the point of a 1 month withdrawal. The purpose of a place like that is to help you learn how to abstain from using drugs in a safe environment and to help you START your journey to a clean lifestyle. It does not help you at all to deal with the reality of living clean in the real world, with stress, bills, work, children, relationships, etc.

A standard 28-day rehab helps you gain skills and tools to start working on yourself. Helps you de-stress from everyday life as you embark on sobriety. It is a quiet place where you can get through the initial difficult period of the first 4 weeks without the use of substances.

Keep in mind: no rehab will "fix" it. YOU have to do that. A 28-day program gives you some time and space to figure out a few things.

Ideally, rehabilitation should last much longer, between 3 months and 1 year. They should include phases in which you gradually develop more real-world skills as you become more comfortable and confident in your sobriety. Phase 1 is usually intense reflection while you are in the facility, perhaps with occasional visits from family. Phase 2 may include some off-site meetings, doctor visits, trips to the store, brief introductions to the world at large. Phase 3 could include overnight family visits and a gradual increase in off-site activities. The next phase (s) could begin to focus on finding a job, securing a sober life, more "real world" tasks. During each phase, you will continue to focus primarily on yourself and your recovery, attending psychosocial education groups. , attending 12-step fellowship meetings,

Again, ideally, this type of rehabilitation, actually any inpatient rehabilitation, should be followed with an intensive outpatient program. These IOPs generally last 12 weeks and focus on your continuing to gain skills and support as you learn to navigate the real world while you are clean.

Many people cannot afford the time or money for inpatient rehab, and insurance companies are reluctant to cover standard rehab, let alone long-term rehab. Many people opt for outpatient rehab that is more practical for someone with a job and a family, as well as their pocketbook. These IOPs are often supported by the community and / or covered by insurance. Recovery houses are also an interesting route to take and are gaining popularity. He lives and works normally, but while living in a regulated home with other recovering addicts. He usually attends some internal meetings regularly, in addition to meeting the 12-step fellowship meeting requirement.

I will say it again. No installation, program or person is going to save you. YOU MUST SAVE IT. Get to work and you will see the results.

If rehabilitation of any kind is not an option, attend a 12-step meeting. Listen with an open mind and DO NOT USE NO MATTER WHAT. If you are offered the opportunity to go to rehab and it is feasible, GO. It can't hurt and you will learn some valuable skills for your journey on the road to recovery and how to better manage your "reality."

Good luck! Peace Mandie

Behavioral psychologists have shown in studies that humans are far from rational. The reason for this is simple. We do not live in reality. We live in our perceptions of it. If your perceptions are wrong (they all are at some point), you misinterpret reality.

So RDF is the ability to change people's perceptions. Think about it. If you change your perceptions, you change your reality. If you change your reality, you change your emotions. Since emotions drive us to act, you influence people's actions. This is the basis of marketing. If you create the perception that eve

Keep reading

Behavioral psychologists have shown in studies that humans are far from rational. The reason for this is simple. We do not live in reality. We live in our perceptions of it. If your perceptions are wrong (they all are at some point), you misinterpret reality.

So RDF is the ability to change people's perceptions. Think about it. If you change your perceptions, you change your reality. If you change your reality, you change your emotions. Since emotions drive us to act, you influence people's actions. This is the basis of marketing. If you create the perception that everyone wants a product, people will really want the product and they will get it. Then the illusion comes true. I suggest you read a post I published on the subject in The Psychology Behind Steve Jobs' Charisma (And Why Apple Still Needs It).

Also, remember that the human mind works by trying to validate its environment. This way, if you create a certain approach, people will find facts to back it up. If you think your wife is cheating on you, you will notice how suspicious her behavior is. If you think your product will be the next hit, you will focus on all of its good features. You will be overconfident and overlook the negative aspects of your project. This is why most startups fail. If you want to distort reality, create a story, people will find facts to support it themselves. Cults do the same. They isolate people to create certain perceptions of the world. For members, these are not perceptions. They are reality. Isn't the apple often compared to a cult?

Finally, there is a difference between Jobs's RDF and, for example, Bill Clinton's RDF. For me, Job clearly had what in psychiatry we call a group B personality disorder. He had antisocial characteristics (not respecting the rights of others, lying, stealing, neglecting children), borderline characteristics of personality disorder (instability of interpersonal relationships, affections and impulse control), histrionic characteristics (excessive seeking of attention and emotionality) and narcissistic characteristics (grandiosity, need for admiration and lack of empathy). This gave him the ability to be very convincing. In fact, someone who doesn't mind being rude will have an indomitable will. Since the perception it creates is only as strong as the certainty it shows about it, This makes Jobs quite a convincing guy. Bill Clinton, on the other hand, was very empathetic. The way he looked at people made them feel unique and special. Clinton was creating sympathy and showing a lot of certainty. Can you distrust someone who wants your well-being and is sure of how to achieve it? There are many techniques to cover to create a strong RDF, but this is the basics. I think the main point is: you live in your perceptions of reality. Change perceptions if you want to change reality. The most important rhetorical notion to remember is to speak with certainty. If you focus on certain aspects of life, certain events or emotions, you will find facts to support your story. Create a story for people; they will make it happen themselves. Nevertheless,

The social construction of reality simply refers to the mutually established unconscious consensus on the ontological state of individuals, as well as on how we should live. In other words: shared beliefs about what things are, such as beauty and reality itself (see Prashanth's answer) and expectations about lifestyle and behavior.

Interestingly, there are dominant (social) constructions of reality, as well as sub-constructions: subcultures, which are branches of the dominant culture and are made up of their own values, expectations, norms, and other ideas regarding reality that (typically

Keep reading

The social construction of reality simply refers to the mutually established unconscious consensus on the ontological state of individuals, as well as on how we should live. In other words: shared beliefs about what things are, such as beauty and reality itself (see Prashanth's answer) and expectations about lifestyle and behavior.

Interestingly, there are dominant (social) constructions of reality, as well as sub-constructions: subcultures, which are branches of the dominant culture and are made up of their own values, expectations, norms, and other ideas regarding reality that (typically) reflect reality. relationship of the participants with the dominant culture - and the micro-constructions - the individual construction of reality.

For example, this answer is a reflection of a micro-construction. It is a model that I am unfolding in my mind to understand what we mean by the social construction of reality.

There are metaphorical terms that refer to what we call the social construction of reality. See Pete's answer: The Matrix. These are tools for understanding, as well as other topics depicted in many movies.

I recently came across the occult term Egregore, which encapsulates this idea very well. Commonly, it is as if we unconsciously consult the Egregore, as he indirectly directs our culture. Of course, just another model.


One additional thought:

These constructs, and the relationships to each other, can be modified, especially together, and become dynamic, growth-oriented, and evocative, rather than declarative in nature. This would become apparent in small-scale contexts comprising individuals who, having shed their cultural skin / operating system, achieve novel ways of relating to each other and to the universe, while giving birth to intelligence (s) ( s) and latent potentials that would otherwise remain latent and unprovoked.

To illustrate: there is a difference between a social context that typically maintains one's image, values, and expectations, and one whose participants are actively participating with each other and with the environment, as well as creating new contexts and purposes that still evoke more development. , growth, connectivity and community, while catapulting participants to excellence.

(Sorry, personal ramblings of mine that I found relevant to answering this question;))

Thanks for the A2A, Pete!

For me, Steve Jobs was responsible for the following:

  1. He managed to cajole Steve Wozniak into building what is now known as Apple I, and he actually made a business out of it. Now Woz was perfectly happy to be an anonymous engineer at HP, but Jobs changed that. Apple then became one of the pioneers of personal computing and basically charted the course of personal computing, the impact of which can still be seen to this day.
  2. After Apple gave him the go-ahead, he played with NeXT and Pixar. He invested large sums of money in Pixar and went gold several years later, when Pixar
Keep reading

For me, Steve Jobs was responsible for the following:

  1. He managed to cajole Steve Wozniak into building what is now known as Apple I, and he actually made a business out of it. Now Woz was perfectly happy to be an anonymous engineer at HP, but Jobs changed that. Apple then became one of the pioneers of personal computing and basically charted the course of personal computing, the impact of which can still be seen to this day.
  2. After Apple gave him the go-ahead, he played with NeXT and Pixar. He invested large sums of money in Pixar and went gold several years later when Pixar signed a deal with Disney that resulted in Toy Story. And he was able to play rough with Michael Eisner when the time comes, actually helping Disney get stronger in the process.
  3. As for NeXT, it may not achieve everything you would like, but thanks to NeXTSTEP, it was able to open the doors of Apple and make its return.
  4. Upon his return to Apple, he succeeded in revitalizing the company, basically lifting the company out of near certain death. Not only that, he had the vision to really change Apple from being a mere computer company to a lifestyle brand that everyone aspires to own, and he managed to revolutionize other industries along the way like music and the mobile phone industry as well. . Seven years after his death, Apple is now a $ 1 trillion company in terms of market capitalization, which is undoubtedly a contribution from the foundation Jobs laid upon his return.

Now it may have its personality quirks, many of which I find distasteful. But there is no denying that he has accomplished a lot in his 56 years. And it should be applauded for that.

That may be his perspective, not necessarily, that may be how he sees it. Not me at all. A creative mind tends to follow the paths of thought and can wander in very different directions and follow complicated paths. Creative thinking looks for solutions, so it explores what it has in its own vast memory storage and looks for ideas for ways forward that could be successful. Through trial and error, many of these paths are explored and many ideas are discarded ...

Continue with Quora + Unlock this answer and support creators like K Grace-Lily by joining Quora + Start your free trial

In reality, a warp is typically an inadvertent and generally undesirable bend, while a bend is an intentional warp or twist. In furniture making, warped wood should generally be avoided or straightened and bent wood is made for particular shapes and types of furniture (usually chairs).

If you mean the type of temporal or spatial warping as described in science fiction, that is fantasy and not reality. The differences are what the authors want them to be within the limits of what is credible or at least acceptable to the audience.

Other Guides:


GET SPECIAL OFFER FROM OUR PARTNER.