Some popular productivity advice is completely made up.

Some popular productivity advice is completely made up

Have you noticed it yet?
There is a wave of learning and productivity tips that sound scientific … but aren’t.

Take the “100-hour rule.”
The premise: Dedicate 100 hours a year (roughly 18 minutes a day) to learning or practicing, and you’ll become significantly better than most people at it.

And that sounds easy.
And it looks good.
And it feels right.

In reality? Just a catchy heuristic. Not a principle grounded in cognitive science.

Or the “rule of 3 tasks a day” ... a tip that ignores context, complexity, or cognitive load.

Maybe a rule like “wake up at 5am” helps someone feel productive.
But forcing that on a night owl? It can wreck sleep quality and hurt actual productivity.

So much of what circulates online is subjective opinion.

Before acting on this kind of advice, ask yourself:

↳ Did I validate that it’s grounded in learning theory?
↳ Did I check whether it’s based on solid research?
↳ Did I consider that it might be more opinion than principle?

If that sounds like a lot of work - just ask ChatGPT about the tip.

So, even though it would be easy, why don’t we check in the first place?

Because:
We want answers that look simple ... so we latch onto bite-sized “rules.” They’re like fast food: satisfying in the moment, but not built for long-term results.

And creators want engagement ... because boldness earns clicks, and nuance gets ignored. They’re serving dopamine tapas: small, spicy bites designed to keep you coming back, not nourish you.

Then repetition turns opinion into belief … and myths are born.

Mind you ... sometimes a myth can be a powerful placebo.

Which would you like to keep?

#Microblog11
🚢 10/30