My problem with this scale is not really about grading or labeling people per se, but more about what the label or grade says about the person giving it, rather than the person receiving it. Let me ask you a question that I want you to reflect on for a little moment and then answer truthfully: From a scale of one to ten, how would you grade yourself?

Have you decided yet? I'm sure you've thought about this before, right? And notice that I left out any type of reference to what attribute or variable the scale represents. Although I'm fairly certain that most of you graded yourself based on what you think your value is and what you think others perceive of you. Furthermore, I'm guessing that you base your value a lot on your looks, your external features. And finally, I think you gave yourself a grade of either six or seven. Am I right? I'm pretty sure I am, and for the case of this argument I'll just assume that I am.

Now that we're asking questions, have you ever rated someone below five, have you ever given someone a three or a four? My guess is no, in fact most of the time people stick to sixes, sevens, eights, nines and tens. Because very few people are really ugly, and most people (women) you bother rating are probably average or fairly pretty at least. Also, the ten is very rarely given, because the ten is what perfect is. And while someone might seem perfect at a glance, as soon as you get to know them they become more "human" and less attractive. For example, when I was 14 and started the  8th grade, there was this really hot girl in my class, I thought she was smoking and would probably have labeled here a ten (I don't remember if I used "the scale"). But then as a months passed and we started to hang out and became friends, she became less and less attractive to the point where I'd get irritated with her, i.e. I got to know her for who she was. And just like I said, nobody is perfect when you get to know them, in fact nobody is perfect, period. Except for Chuck Norris, obviously.

So now that we know the numbers we most commonly use are six to nine and that nobody is perfect, I want to tell you another reason I think that rating people is kind of stupid. Rating women says more about what you think of yourself in regards to them rather than their actual "value" or "hotness". In other words, if you regard yourself a seven and you see a women that you think is very attractive, you'll probably rate her an eight or a nine, if you see someone less attractive than you, you'll rate them a five or a six. The problem with this is that you then see people as being less or more valuable than yourself. The people you hold higher than yourself you never talk to because you're afraid you won't matter to them, the people you look down upon you don't talk to because you don't think they're worth your time. Maybe you're starting to recognize yourself a bit in this way of thinking? I sure did when I first heard it. As a matter of fact, I'd argue this is how most people think about other people – in terms of what value they have. Nobody really likes the person kissing your ass, and nobody really likes kissing anybody else's ass either. Think about what characterizes the person that everybody likes and admires, he (or she) is the one who talks to everybody, regardless of looks, social status or perceived value. He is always the one who gives value to others, a selfless person who doesn't come across as needy and consequently he is the one who is liked by everyone and has friends everywhere. He doesn't even think in terms of value and who he deserves or who deserves him, he interacts with everyone because everyone has the same value. He'll talk to the really hot girl at the bar because he doesn't see her as being of higher value than him just because she is attractive, and he wouldn't come close to thinking about her in terms of a number. He'll talk to the old woman sitting across from him on the subway just as a nice gesture and he'll talk to the little kid playing on the street. He's a solid guy with real integrity and high inner value. Value?! But I just said value wasn't important! Well, the thing is that we all have an internal value, a value that's not based on external things like looks or material belongings. It's the type of value that we don't get from others labeling us. Instead, it's very much in line with how we are and how we behave as well as what we think of ourselves and our actions (real confidence, hello!). The "guy" above, a prince charming with a Colgate smile, is just an example. There is nobody like him, and nor should there be. Perfect is not human, and that's why Chuck Norris is not human.

Chuck Norris once ordered a Big Mac at Burger King, and got one.

I will continue this blog in a part 2 about the value scale, where I talk about Chuck Norris… No, not really. I'll talk about the only value scale worth mentioning, the exception to the rule – just like Chuck Norris. Ok, this not funny anymore. On another note, I'd like to give credit to AJ and Jordan Harbinger at the Pick Up Podcast which not only got me thinking about value in terms of what I've written above but also taught me these ideas and perspectives. They have a great free podcast that you can check out on iTunes!

Check back soon,

- Philip