Chase Hughes

Or I reframe this as someone is a complete threat.

But I've changed your perception of what's possible to do.

Then the context is some person is a threat.

And now I say the word mortal.

They're a mortal threat.

So I've changed the category.

And if I shift category and context, that changes what you think you're allowed to do and what you're not allowed to do.

Does that make sense?

So if I'm in a perfect world, the only question, if you're really good at this stuff, like a lot of these systems are, what is the context where the behavior I want you to do is automatic?

What is the context?

So if I can make you believe that you're in a shooting range and you're actually standing in a bar, your behavior is going to be very different.

So what you're really seeing over time is a drift of perception and then context.

So with this PCP, perception, context, and permission.

Permission is that final thing that says, oh, in this context, I'm completely allowed to do this and it makes perfect sense.

So a lot of what we're seeing is context engineering.

So if you look at the Milgram experiment, which I think a lot of people are familiar with, essentially they prove that people will shock strangers what they think is to death in about 47 minutes at a 70% success rate or failure rate, whatever you want to call that.

But they didn't have a script.

There wasn't some magic sales script where they brought them in and they had the right words to say and the magic hypnosis guy that comes in there.

It's just a dude in a lab coat.

And all they did in the Milgram experiment is engineer the conditions that make it okay.