A short soft skills course
createcapsule.com
createcapsule.com
But in cases where the service needs to be explained and demand generated AFTER explanation in can be counter productive to lead with pricing.
But if you google the product name and the word pricing, they will have a dedicated pricing page in the search results that isn't linked to from anywhere inside the site.
Why should I want to buy a product/service when you are so bloody shady about the price...
$84 thereafter."
so, is it $84/week?
Yes, it should. It should be difficult, challenging, at times it should make you want to give up, confusing, even painful. It should take quite a while, too.
Now someone else goes through the same process, but it's at least a partial struggle. That person has bouts of wanting to give up, of having to fight through pain and discomfort. That person wakes up half the time and their monkey brain is telling them to skip the gym today, just go back to sleep.
Person B has earned much more than a six pack in this scenario.
Per my other post, right now it feels like Person B just took an extra hardship for no good reason whatsoever other than its a hardship. If that's their norm, if they keep taking unnecessary hardships, they'll just constantly accomplish less for no specific reason.
If this is a hobby, a challenge they set for themselves, then this is no longer about specific accomplishment but about challenge itself. But then it doesn't apply to the course - which aims to produce a result with less hardship. Which is what most of us most of the time seek - I have a car because it's less hardship than walking 57km a day in rain to my work. I have an apartment because it's less hardship than living in a tent in a big city. I wear warm clothes in the winter because it's less hardship than being very cold constantly. I read articles because it's less hardship than watching long protracted videos. If I aim to learn something and that's the entirety of my goal, I will absolutely seek out the most efficient path there without.
Back in the day, back in the old country, my math teacher insisted we all use a book of logarithmic and trig tables. It was couple of hundred pages of numbers. It accomplished exactly the same thing as a calculator - it didn't enable us to learn anything more or figure out result ourselves - it was just harder than a calculator - a hardship for sake of hardship. The prof never ever could understand that it brought us no benefit over a calculator - and time saved could've been spent actually learning something extra or something better.
So there's a place for self-imposed barriers, occasionally, for specific purposes. But they're not inherently good or to be sought out - especially when you have an actual, specific goal and objective you want to accomplish.
And my point is it will fail. You won't get the best result without the hardship, and it's disingenuous to claim so. That's my opinion.
> Which is what most of us most of the time seek - I have a car because it's less hardship than walking 57km a day in rain to my work. I have an apartment because it's less hardship than living in a tent in a big city. I wear warm clothes in the winter because it's less hardship than being very cold constantly. I read articles because it's less hardship than watching long protracted videos.
I get what you're saying. But I see this as a problem long term. I see an optimization of comfort and "get to the end result as fast and 'efficient' as possible" and I don't like what that says for the future of human beings. Again, my opinion. Neither of us is wrong or right here.
"Accomplished more"? By your own premise, not.
In modern society both axis have value; but there is not, in my mind, bravery or respect in pointless, self-incurred, avoidable hardship.
It's a discussion I frequently have with my dad. He's extremely proud, and will tell anybody in any circumstance (get ready for too much information ;) that he went for his cystoscopy without anesthetic. But as much as I love him and he's my #1 role model in general, I don't see a point of that, and especially not as a point of pride. If you were in a country/place/situation where you can't have anesthetic, OK, now it's bravery. We all went through a war and had our lovely little chance to demonstrate bravery (do not recommend / would not buy again;). But if anesthetic is available, the norm, right there, and you refuse it, what is the moral victory here?
Again, I absolutely will give points for effort and bravery in face of hardship. But your description of person B, on its face, is just pointless hardship for the sake of hardship. It feels like person A will accomplish three more things in the time it took person B to accomplish that one, so again, assuming it's self-incurred, they're just slowing themselves down and handicapping for no good reason. ️
(note: if in your scenario they have different circumstances that forced hardship on B but not on A, that's different; but it feels you're championing hardship for the sake of hardship, and I firmly believe societal progress is all about eliminating as much hardship as we can for as many people as we can, so we can step up to the next level of accomplishment rather than being stuck on something that can be made easier)
Let's say I, as a non-runner, decide I want to run a marathon in 6 months. Everything that happens between now and then - setting a goal, learning how to train, putting in the work every single day, fighting through the foot pain, skipping out on that ice cream, etc. - will serve me well beyond the singular race.
That's what I'm talking about. My original post was referencing silly marketing language that improving yourself shouldn't feel like work. Imagine someone stated that "training for a marathon shouldn't feel like work." Yes, it motherfucking should. Otherwise you're just skipping out on the stuff that will make you a better/stronger person in favor of some outcome that doesn't truly matter in the long term.
This is the tricky bit. The stated goal is "running a marathon". What you're effectively saying is that the stated goal is not the real goal, and that the real goal is self-improvement for its own sake, with the marathon just being an arbitrary OKR.
Perhaps I'm already in a perfectly fine physical condition, I'm more than capable of running a marathon, and all the preparation I need is learning the pace of a marathon. Perhaps all those self-improvement benefits are things I've already achieved in my life and are not lessons I need to relearn. Perhaps I don't give a damn about any of those so-called self-improvement benefits, and just want to run.
What I "should" get from the experience is entirely up to me, and you're in no position to impose more goals than the stated "I want to run a marathon" goal.
From a loosely neuroscience perspective (I had quite a few courses but I'm not a professional or scientist in that field), no it isn't. What do you think "feelings" are?
It "feels" very different when your brain finds out that it's current wiring may need major updates (work! literally, for the brain) compared to when it finds that the current wiring is good enough.
All those light and strong "feelings" don't come from some nebulous ether.
When are people really open to changing their ways? Two examples for a smoker:
1. You hear (again) that smoking is bad. Maybe you also get (yet again) a few scientific study pointers. You feel... nothing (bored?)
2. Somebody you love unexpectedly is diagnosed with lung cancer and since they always were chain smokers it really hits you deep. You feel really bad, and it's string bad.
Which of the two experiences is more likely to lead somebody to really change their ways?
That's two extremes, but all feelings are reflections of actual state of your hardware. The brain would prefer not to have to change, the point it got to (the here and now) was hard fought for already so any new, especially major changes need to prove that they are worth it. The new state will be unproven and uncertain, if it's a major adaptation it will take many iterations.
(but wouldn't that be nice?)
I like the way American actor Denzel Washington put it: "Ease is a greater threat to progress than hardship".
/slams $0.02 on the bar and walks off to read Thoreau :P
It sometimes uses outdated language but it is to date the best compilation of "how to interact with other humans effectively" advice that I've read, and I've read lots of these sorts of books.
Honestly, I think it should be required reading in highschool, if nothing else because of the huge focus on empathy would be very healthy in interpersonal communication in our country.
Isn't influencing others simply a side-benefit to being genuinely interested in them? I would imagine that is the natural outcome. I would be glad for people to go into the book wanting to "fix other people" or "take advantage of others" and come away wanting to genuinely care for others.
WOW, thank you for all the feedback and signups! My name is Jasmine and I'm the creator of Capsule. To sign up free, just submit your name and email (no need to complete the PayPal screen), and I'll send you an activation link (check for yourteam@createcapsule.com). I did NOT expect to get featured today, so thank you for bearing with the slight delay!
I originally wrote Capsule for myself and for my friends -- busy professionals who “didn’t have time for self-development” but were struggling with problems we all face, whether relationships, career uncertainty, stress or self-doubt. I'm also an independent introvert - the type to want to introspect as opposed to seek therapy. So, I set out to create a one-stop-research-shop. An avid reader, I quit my hedge fund gig to bring you only the research that I found compelling from a sea of content :) My hope is, if it can help me, maybe it can help others, too. Any and all comments appreciated and will help improve the product -- many thanks!
[1] On Safari, I have 1Blocker and AdGuard — General enabled.
Maybe OP can elaborate on that submission?
(I’m also of the opinion that regardless of mental health status, every person can benefit from a good therapist. Note, I said good. A bad therapist can be worse than no therapy.)
A lot of soft skills really do come down to introspection — and while it’s certainly possible to get those insights outside of a psychologist or psychiatrists office (my psychiatrist also does psychotherapy, but it’s more common for the disciplines to be separate), having a third-party pose questions and stimulate discussions is something difficult to replicate by self-study alone.
They really should offer the first lesson for free so people know what they're paying for.
I pride myself on my strong soft skills, so I know I won't be paying that kind of a price on these lessons just to see what they look like.
I have been trying to put my finger on what about it rubs me the wrong way so much but can't quite figure out why the phrase makes me so uncomfortable. Part of it is the implication that we're all socially inept computer nerds, part of it is the implication that technical skills are "hard"...
If the creator(s) are reading, I would suggest making the first chapter free. That would work better to get visitors to sign up & pay. For example, from what I can see there are 9 missions, so the first is free, pay to continue.
I found Capsule very valuable. The content is 2nd to none, they boil down some huge concepts that span thousands of pages across multiple books/papers into dense and digestible bites of material. Very high bandwidth and efficient.
I see a lot of commentary about the price being high. I'm not sure whether they have the right price point or not, but what I would say as someone who considers myself pretty frugal, I would compare the value I got from Capsule to a series of books and probably therapists that would've cost hundreds or thousands of dollars (and many more hours).
There's also a way to write in to a real-life person/team with follow-on thoughts/questions after each section. I've done this a number of times not really expecting much, but have been blown away with how fast and thoughtful a response I've always gotten. Almost feels like you're getting personal coach (which they are really underselling IMHO).
>In any software company, if everyone could code, they would, and then they would realize soft skills are just an indirect way to influence what people code without knowing how to.
This is completely untrue and is frankly, insulting. It’s not an either/or. You can know how to code or know how to architect a system or do design and also have soft skills. Moreover, the idea that non-coders can only have an indirect influence on what people code seems to be a fairy fundamental misunderstanding about how projects work.
Plenty of people can code and don’t — and plenty of people who don’t code don’t have any interest in doing it — still have major roles in software development. Look at Steve Jobs.
If anything, the soft skills are what allows a programmer or a program manager or PM or designer or architect to help express the case for any something is coded a certain way or why it isn’t.
Being able to explain and communicate design decisions — and to be able to talk through problems and blockers is incredibly important, not just to push or influence a decision, but to solve problems or come up with new innovations.
Knowing how to code and actually coding is different. I'm claiming if everyone could (in a software company) have the knowledge of coding, they would, as this would influence virtually every decision being made. Of course most people are happy not knowing how to code, but if they could snap their fingers and simply know everything about developing their own products, they would.
Usually this is dealt with "methodologies" like agile. Technical and non-technical people have to close the "gap" so that the stakeholders (who usually don't code in any advanced way) are happy with the direction that is being taken. There's a lot of efforts wasted in meetings to coordinate and prevent non-technical leaders from making the wrong technical decisions.
Or maybe that would be the best improvement program of all?