Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Simple living, extreme early retirement, becoming and being wealthy, wisdom, praxis, personal growth,...
Post Reply
ertyu
Posts: 2893
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:31 am

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by ertyu »

Quadalupe wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 12:30 am

IMO socratic style works best in real life, from teacher to student. On a forum, there are several downsides for applying this model in a student to teacher way:
To add what is to me probably the greatest disadvantage to the socratic discussion style: it presupposes a student and a teacher. What I mean by this: the teacher is the one who knows. Knowledge and wisdom reside there. Thus, authority and power reside there, with the person who pronounces on "how things are." The student does not have knowledge and wisdom. The student's head is round and empty, and he waits patiently for the teacher to deposit knowledge there. Depending on the institutional circumstances of the student-teacher interaction, the student might be allowed to be challenging with their "why"-s. In cases where the student pays tuition, they consider themselves superior, being "the client" who hires you to perform a service for them. But regardless of how exactly the socratic method is deployed, its crux is power and authority (or the contestation of power and authority i guess).

The second method you presented posits from the start an implicit equality between the participants in the discussion. The very structure of the discussion requires it of you. You are required to pay attention to the point of the other participant - it is something valuable and you should be able to grasp it well enough to re-express it. To affirm the value of the other's point, you then specifically point out what you learned or what you consider to be worthwhile in their point. Then you go on expressing your point, and the structure of the discussion requires your co-discussant to respect it just like you respected theirs.

While the second approach, applied in full, can be cumbersome and formulaic, it can be invaluable in real life when tensions are high.

I'm not sure I should be butting into this, but I also find it hard to understand the theory. By which I mean that you can tell me "the system should be resilient and have redundance" and I surface-level know what you told me but for me to actually understand, what is most helpful are multiple example iterations of applications in different areas, such as what @BLL wrote out for example. Through repeated exposure to actual example, I internalize the key principles. While other people's brains find it most valuable to abstract and synthesize what is useful into pithy, theoretical language because once you've told them that theory, you've told them a principle and they then take that principle and apply it to their individual circumstances. To those people, multiple iterations of examples are a waste of time because they're a repetition of something they already know - the pithy principle, which they have already been told. I think it's a difference in learning styles personally.

BWND
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2018 3:08 am

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by BWND »

I agree with the efforts to nudge the thread back on track.

I suggested this separate thread might be useful given the benefits of the yields and flows thread 5 - 6. What I had in mind was that'd it'd be people comfortably within WL 6 helping each other out with a bit of guidance from people that are pushing beyond that. The Quadalupe-Jacob interaction was a great example - "Here's what I've been working on" "Here's what that does and doesn't do", "Thanks, going to go back and rework".

I'm not full into WL6 level yet, hence I've mainly took a back seat and not posted at length (but I feel a sense of responsibility since I suggested the thread :lol: ). I appreciate the lines are blurred though.

I suppose just a reminder that the yields and flows thread may be old but the discussion can carry on there, rather than going over that stuff in this thread (simply because it's new).

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by IlliniDave »

ertyu wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 1:15 am
I'm not sure I should be butting into this, but I also find it hard to understand the theory. By which I mean that you can tell me "the system should be resilient and have redundance" and I surface-level know what you told me but for me to actually understand, what is most helpful are multiple example iterations of applications in different areas, such as what @BLL wrote out for example. Through repeated exposure to actual example, I internalize the key principles. While other people's brains find it most valuable to abstract and synthesize what is useful into pithy, theoretical language because once you've told them that theory, you've told them a principle and they then take that principle and apply it to their individual circumstances. To those people, multiple iterations of examples are a waste of time because they're a repetition of something they already know - the pithy principle, which they have already been told. I think it's a difference in learning styles personally.
I'd already decided to take my struggles elsewhere but I couldn't help coming back when Quadalupe contributed something that made my tumblers tumble and I wanted to give credit. I think you captured the root cause of why this thread seems to be dividing the community in the sense communication becomes ineffective. I've been both a student and a teacher (mentor, technically) and such impasses are unfortunate and sometimes can't be overcome with neither part being especially at fault.

zbigi
Posts: 978
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:04 pm

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by zbigi »

Alphaville wrote:
Wed Apr 14, 2021 5:11 pm

ive lived among peasants. peasants have no money. all they have is social capital. they are great at it. so their "level" would be 8, or something.

[...]
I've had similar thoughts when I listened to my 91 yo grandma describing her peasant life before she moved to the city. By many standards, she was an ERE god - skills through the roof (e.g. she wore only clothes she made herself, from her own linen or wool), living with almost no money (money was used only occasionally to buy stuff like salt or matches), was deeply embedded in a network of relationships in the village etc. At the same time, this life was a total misery and a constant struggle - for example, her mother got very sick when she was a teenager and she couldn't afford even one doctor's visit (mother got sick by working illegal jobs in a German farm across the border trying to make a little money to save for a cow), she was constantly hungry as a child (they didn't produce enough food for entire family, mostly due to not enough land), events like a family horse or cow getting sick were much more scarier than salaryman's car breaking down etc.

Based on her stories, it seems to me that most important point of ERE is still the "retirement" part i.e. "don't be poor", while everything else is more of a solution for how to live well on a relatively little once you already have the money (which was indeed ERE's original focal point in the blog times I believe). Another doubtful element of ERE for me is that it's basically taking advantage of the system without fully participating in it (via paying regular consumer's amount of taxes) - doing ERE in a poor country (which was definitely Poland in my grandma's youth), where everybody pays little taxes and infrastructure and other state provided means of support are shoddy or non-existent, would be much harder than in a first world country. This makes it more of a temporarily valid "life hack" than a sustainable philosophy for me - on that note, I think even Jacob pointed out a couple of times that ERE is more of a transitional approach and, if it takes on and enough people start quitting jobs around the age of 30-35, the society and economy will undergo radical transformation and a new landscape, requiring new approaches, will emerge.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Another approach I have attempted, which I think was a rough hack between “ERE” and “The Art of Non-Conformity” and “The Renaissance Soul” (I have likely read too many lifestyle design books) combined with spreadsheet math magic was to first create my own Renaissance categories, like those Jacob lists in the book, but personalized. For instance, one of my categories at the time was Beauty and Charm and I didn’t have a Technology category at the time. Then I came up with a giant list of projects/activities that would each further at least a couple of these categories. Then I narrowed the list down a bit, leaving open the option to change my mind or revise based on feedback/results. Then I tracked how much time I ACTUALLY spent on each of these activities inclusive of tracking time which was non-focused. I also tracked subjective rating of my Daily Happiness (which was the factor I was attempting to maximize through this exercise) which I correlated with time spent on each activity at the end of the month.

Anyways, I’m not saying this is akin to doing Level 7 ERE (more like optimization applied to general lifestyle design), I am just noting that this method had the benefits of tracking ACTUAL behavior and therefore ACTUAL yields/results, and it also included a feedback mechanism that provided novel insight towards improvement. For instance, I learned that I enjoy Travel as much as Sex. Huge downside of this method was maintenance time and recognition that Average Daily Happiness and Personal Fulfillment are not synonymous.

I’ve also played around with systems simulation software like Vensim. Doing this can be helpful in ferreting out fuzzy thinking, because your sketch won’t run if you make it fuzzy. I have only succeeded in creating small, not entirely realistic sketches demonstrating (1) the benefit of even small amount of employment income post-FI retirement and (2) survival flows on Northern Woods permaculture project. As with my “spreadsheet magic” method above, the fact that these small models included feedback loops and multiple iterations allowed for some novel insight. For instance, acreage devoted to solar panels was more valuable than I realized in Northern Woods model and amount of employment income necessary to greatly reduce fail of Portfolio was much smaller than I anticipated (once again I will emphasize very simple, not entirely realistic, theoretical models of my own devising.)

Main point I am trying to make is that if we look back at Quadelupe’s excellent diagrams, we need a way of noticing whether or not “hard work harvesting in the garden” actually does contribute positively to Health, and also a means by which to notice other flows. For instance, one thing I very much enjoy about “harvesting” is the aesthetic and sensual appeal of my garden is usually also peaking with harvest. So, I look forward to the experience of the warm earth under my feet, the blooming flowers right at eye height, and the warm sweetness of strawberries as I squat in the garden with my basket. OTOH, until/unless further corrections are made, I might view the increased possibility of sunburn and bee sting allergic reaction as negative flows to Health. Etc etc

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Another example from the files of cuckoo-bananas-lifestyle design NOT ERE would be that I designed my practice of polyamory to provide a number of different flows inclusive of some Food and Zombie Apocalypse Rescue. I literally requested Zombie Apocalypse Rescue as part of relationship contracts. Unfortunately, I did experience a personal level Zombie Apocalypse because my sister/housemate/business-partner/closest friend suffered a major psychotic break, and we have all experienced a Zombie Apocalypse in the form of Covid. My cuckoo-bananas plan actually (somewhat surprisingly) did work for provision of Zombie Apocalypse Rescue, but it had unforeseen negative feedback loops (free restaurant dinners, free expensive groceries exchanged for cooking skill)with provision of Food which have contributed to the fact that I am now too much in possession of Fat and even somewhat out of the habits of Frugal Cooking.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15907
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by jacob »

I'm glad this worked out amiably and that the forum didn't explode overnight. A bunch of things ...

The Wheaton table was originally designed because it was a recurring problem that someone figured that all they needed to do to solve "their friend's financial problem" was to point them towards ERE. Failure inevitably obtained. That's the eco-scale equivalent of telling someone who is worred about climate change that they should sell their McMansion and move into a wofati and grow a garden forest and all will be well. (And yes, people sincerely recommend this as a first step all the time!) Instead the table was intended for people familiar with ERE to meet people where they are. Much similar to having discussions about morality with children using the Kohlberg scale: When Johnny bullied Bob, it's better to have a talk [with Johnny] about how he thinks that made Bob feel and the importance of being nice to each other (Kohlberg3 vs Johnny's Kohlberg2) than to start a Kohlberg5 discussion about "how the decision not to hit each other has been codified into law under democratic principles". The ERE wheaton table worked very well for this. Spouses and friends would be given a copy of Dave Ramsey, Bogleheads, or JL Collins depending on their understanding using the table to effectively gauge their understanding.

The first uninteded side-effect was that some began to use the table to rank themselves. Sometimes this worked---in cases where people were used to dealing with "loose tables". Other times it failed spectacularly when people came in from other "table usage cultures".

The second unintended side-effect was that some began to see the table as a personal development reference. This was okay because if you're WLn, the table was also constructed in a way that the WLn+1 descriptions made sense. This is like how if you're in the 8th grade math class and look at a 9th grade math book or sit in on a class, much of it but not all of it makes sense and seem within reach.

The third and worst uninteded side-effect was was that others saw it as a cheat-sheet or fast track to skip a grade or even multiple grades. "Why spend time on WL4->5 when I can just go directly from WL4->7". It seemed a short step to point out that those higher n+3 descriptions, for a given n, were "hard to understand" and that someone (read jacob) should figure out how to communicate e.g. WL7 in a plain-spoken manner so everybody could understand it, preferable on one sheet of paper to avoid having to spend all of one afternoon on it. The implication was also that if one was smart enough one should be able to edit the table accordingly. More questions about whether the table or even ERE itself was deliberately designed to be obtuse or overcomplicated. This is when my head exploded.

Look, I understand the attraction. There are things like this
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=P ... npAIlKgm3N ... please pick one, any one, that looks interesting to you and watch the whole damn thing and come back. I'll wait.

No, seriously!

I could do this for ERE. Maybe in yet another podcast. Maybe in another table. However, that table would be different from the ERE Wheaton table. Because THAT problem is not a Wheaton problem, that is, figuring out where to meet people to provide them with proper material. This new problem, lets call it the "ERE WIRED table" is about explaining a complex philosophy like ERE to respectively a child, a high schooler, an undergraduate, a grad student, and an expert. For the "ERE WIRED table" it would be different people; maybe the 5 people would be "CFP advisor", "Wall Street trader", "Permaculturist", "Survivalist", and "SAHM".

So basically, there's nothing wrong with ERE Wheaton table in terms of design or communication. It works just fine the way it's intended for those it's intended for. The issue is that some want a different table, which I suspect is an "ERE WIRED table" type of thing. Perhaps they want to "explain ERE to their parents"---but this is a very different problem than figuring out how to get their parents to set up a budget or realize that they could have a nicer home if they spent less on cars.

There's of course another side-effect that comes with an ERE WIRED table. It is quite conceivable that the proverbial high-schooler will conclude after listening to WIRED's youtube explanation that "Ahhh, now quantum mechanics is suddenly all clear to me. Let me have a Socratic debate where I challenge some of the assumptions of that expert professor over there. They should be able to withstand some of my criticisms."

That would be this: https://xkcd.com/675/ Please click.

Again, I'll wait. Seriously!

And this: https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Chesterton%27s_Fence

I'll wait! It's just one paragraph.

To which I say fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck or something to that effect (pardon my sailor-speak). The problem here was experienced in several threads most notably the "climate wars" and the "index wars". Namely, the Mt Stupid effect. Once people know a little (enough to be dangerous) but not enough to realize how little they know, they become rather obnoxius. Worse, because this is the internet, other people (third-person), who often don't know anything themselves, can often not tell the difference between the "expert" and the "inquisitive idiot running google searches".

If I sometimes (or all the time) come across as condescending it's because I actually do know a lot about certain things and more importantly I know what I don't know and try to respect the limits of my knowledge. If this is arrogant, at least it's not conceited. But verily, if I was paid by the hour by those who initially thought they were watching a Socratic debate between people with equal knowledge but eventually realized and reluctantly admitted (some 200 posts later) that I knew 10x more than my "partner" or the level the debate was held at, ... I'd be rather rich. In my defense, I do think I'm rather quick to bow out against people who clearly know more than I do. I certainly converge towards teacher/student dynamics because two people very seldom come in with equal amounts of knowledge unless they both know close to nothing, which of course is quite common.

Basically Mt Stupid shouldn't really be drawn as a mountain but rather as an equally deep moat or swamp that prevents people who might otherwise learn from learning.

I really don't want ERE (the philosophy) to suffer the same fate as climate science because some insist it should be simplified enough for everybody to have an opinion.

Well, if you want "simplified ERE" just go and check out the "FIRE movement": "Spend less than you earn. Put your savings in stock market index funds. Repeat until you have 25x your annual spending. Then quit your job." That's the simplistic plain-spoken explanation of ERE. It obviously misses a tragic amount of nuance, depth, motivation, and direction, but it's in a language that "everybody can understand".

What oversimplifying does (to a learning culture) is to drag the level downwards. This is why you don't go to "Facebook Academy" to study quantum mechanics. Those who actually do know or insist on using math eventually leave, because they get tired of answering "race car on a train"-questions over and over. It's a question of forum culture. I've seen forums suffer Eternal September because they got too popular. I suspect this is why MMM doesn't bother much with his own forum anymore. In another FIRE group which used to be cool, maybe half the newbie questions are of the "Should I invest in Global Index Fund ABC or Global Index Fund XYZ?"-type. It's easier to ask than to use the search function.

That is this problem: https://meaningness.com/geeks-mops-sociopaths

You don't have to read that one.

I've highlighted this one many times before:
Confucius wrote: If I raise one corner for someone and he cannot come back with the other three, I do not go on.
That's Dennett in a nutshell as far as I can tell: I'm willing to put in my effort in answering a question exactly in proportion to how much thought I perceive the person asking it has put into preparing to understand my answer.

That's also my forum attitude in a nutshell: I'm willing to put in my effort in answering a question exactly in proportion to how much thought I perceive the person asking it has put into preparing to understand my answer.

I'm no classical scholar, but I wonder whether Socrates really had Socratic dialogues or whether the dialogue format was a result of a particular writing technique similar to how classical plays came to feature a person talking with a choir responding back and forth as a way to advance a narrative. Otherwise Socrates must have been driven absolutely bat shit by hundreds of people asking him if he could please explain "logic" again because the dog ate their clay tablet. Remember, Socrates would probably be fine debating Glaucos(SP) but it's a whole other ball game if Socrates is debating a sequential string of Glaucos1-15 doing the same conversation over an over because the other Glaucoses were off having fun elsewhere. I think Confucius understood this and used it as a sorting mechanism. I've been reading Confucius because I think his solutions were better than retreating into a mountain cave like Musashi who eventually got tired of continually being challenged to duels by people who wanted to prove themselves.

There might also be some unspoken contracts here, so to clarify my changing position. I used to think of the forum as a community/knowledge building project but the "account nuking"-crisis and the resulting commentary + a few other developments made it clear to me that I was mistaken and that a forum is not the best format to create this kind of structure. This is also why my efforts here have declined over the past few months. I'm no longer spending time tying up loose threads, filling out blanks, or trying to steer threads in productive directions (except maybe this one). So if the desire is to use the forum for bantering or sharing opinions on how weird Schroedinger's cat is, you can do so, but I'm not your huckleberry. Lifting the remaining corner of ERE-type questions is the only reason I still hang around here. Personally my focus is moving elsewhere although I haven't yet figured out exactly how/where.

User avatar
Alphaville
Posts: 3611
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by Alphaville »

jacob wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 9:24 am
I'm glad this worked out amiably and that the forum didn't explode overnight. A bunch of things ...

The Wheaton table was originally designed because it was a recurring problem that someone figured that all they needed to do to solve "their friend's financial problem" was to point them towards ERE. Failure inevitably obtained. That's the eco-scale equivalent of telling someone who is worred about climate change that they should sell their McMansion and move into a wofati and grow a garden forest and all will be well. (And yes, people sincerely recommend this as a first step all the time!) Instead the table was intended for people familiar with ERE to meet people where they are. Much similar to having discussions about morality with children using the Kohlberg scale: When Johnny bullied Bob, it's better to have a talk [with Johnny] about how he thinks that made Bob feel and the importance of being nice to each other (Kohlberg3 vs Johnny's Kohlberg2) than to start a Kohlberg5 discussion about "how the decision not to hit each other has been codified into law under democratic principles". The ERE wheaton table worked very well for this. Spouses and friends would be given a copy of Dave Ramsey, Bogleheads, or JL Collins depending on their understanding using the table to effectively gauge their understanding.
yes, the wheaton eco-scale is great at doing what it intends, and i understand this is what you wanted to do with your table.

and i also see the side effects you describe so well here, and i have seen you struggle to correct the side effects.
jacob wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 9:24 am
The first uninteded side-effect was that some began to use the table to rank themselves.
[...]
The second unintended side-effect was that some began to see the table as a personal development reference.
[...]
The third and worst uninteded side-effect was was that others saw it as a cheat-sheet or fast track to skip a grade or even multiple grades.
but one thing i have been trying to say from the outset, is that some of those side effects are not solely attributable to the audience, but to the table itself.

i understand that smart people who make an effort to try to be right all the time might react defensively when pointed out that something they've created may have errors, like bad audio or video lighting or whatever. nobody is perfect at everything.

but i think it's dishonest to pretend that all is well and nothing is wrong with a product or performance in order to massage the smart friend's ego. this is how horrible singers end up on american idol: they didn't have an honest friend to point out the problems.

as an audience member, witness, reader, whatever, etc., i see the same unwanted side effects you see with the table--but i think the table can be fixed to mitigate them.

please note, just because i can notice a problem, it doesn't follow that i have "a ready solution" for them. in environments that produce communication materials, these issues are usually not solved ab-ovo, but workshopped in groups.

me posting comments on a forum about it is not me saying "do a better job jacob, give me what want." it's just me trying to make a contribution and asking for other contributions as a group process and trying to workshop the idea.

the issue with the table is not, and should not be, "attack or defend jacob" or "this is ere."

the issue with the table from a communication materials perspective should be: is this material doing what it's supposed to be doing? or is it creating problems due to design and audience reception?

i think it would have taken a lot less time and energy for the group to work on reducing the artifacts and unwanted secondary effects on the table, than to defend its current state and make excuses for it because "ere is different from permaculture," while at the same time trying to fight and/or simultaneously diving deeper into the unwanted side effects it generates.

please note: this is not me saying that "ere should be dumbed down". i'm talking very specifically about removing unwanted side effects from what was intended to be a rough manual on how to communicate with people about a subject unknown to them.

==

the second part, my complaints about "bad theory" are just complaints about unwanted side effects of the table getting out of hand. but it looks like a bunch of other issues are being projected onto my complaints. which, again, might be an artifact of my presentation + audience reception. same as the blessed table. communications problems are everywhere, and solving them is key to functional groups.

for now i want to say no more and i'm putting aside all the rest because i'm hoping the first part is received in the way it was intended.

but if it's not possible then it's not possible.

Hristo Botev
Posts: 1734
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:42 am

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by Hristo Botev »

jacob wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 9:24 am
That's also my forum attitude in a nutshell: I'm willing to put in my effort in answering a question exactly in proportion to how much thought I perceive the person asking it has put into preparing to understand my answer.
That was certainly my experience with you when I started this thread: viewtopic.php?p=228674#p228674. You sent me down a rabbit hole that led me to discover Kingsnorth, Kalmus (or, Klamus - ha!), Scranton, Greenfield, and many others, including Wheaton himself, and it changed the way I look at the world, in a pretty big way, and I'm better for it. And I think my kids and my wife are better for it as well, and even my little Catholic community and my colleagues at my little law firm, even if just a little.

Anyhow, hoping this thread gets back on track as I'm interested in following along, if not contributing as I'm still at the how to progress from 4 to 5 to 6 stage. Speaking selfishly, I'm always interested in hearing of the real-world applications of leveling up that folks on this forum have put into practice (of the live-work-shop-play-learn-socialize all w/in walking/biking distance of one another variety), as opposed to talking about these ideas in the abstract.

AxelHeyst
Posts: 2118
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by AxelHeyst »

Back to the idea of working through WL6>7 examples:

I have an expensive freeride/downhill (FR/DH) mountain bike that I bought ~4 years ago (aka it's designed to be pointed in the direction of gravity, and the rider is supposed to wear lots of protective gear for *when* they hurl their body onto a bunch of rocks/biff the landing off a small cliff). It was $6k MSRP, but I bought it on ebay for $3,200. WL4 or 5 maybe ("I love extreme mountain biking! How can I get a dope MTB without spending a ton of money?")

A WL6 way of thinking about my bike is to examine its
Positive first and second order effects:
  • Fun (My use of the words "stoked", "sick", "dope", and "dude!!!" increase exponentially when I ride)
  • Health (you have to pedal it to the top of the mountain before you can point it down)
  • Social (lots of rides with friends)
  • Being Outdoors
  • Technical/skill (it presents the opportunity to fix it when it breaks)
Negative first and second order effects:
  • Health (every once in a while I'm going to have to go to the hospital, and there's a non-zero risk of high consequence failures such as
    paralysis/death/traumatic brain injury) > second order effect is $$$ for hospital bills, ibuprofen, ankle wraps, and clothing that is nonfunctional
    because it's now torn and bloody.
  • Money (parts break on these bikes all the time because of the extreme use, and the parts are not cheap. Also the gear is more expensive than other styles of riding - full face helmet, greaves, lariat (neck brace), etc etc).
  • Storage space requirement
  • Time spent fixing it, which I mostly don't enjoy
  • Have to drive it to the trailhead because decent FR/DH trails aren't that common. Almost no one lives riding distance to decent FR/DH trails. > Second order effect is thus a high carbon footprint.
^This could all be put on a reverse fishbone diagram like in ch5. At this level of thinking, I'm looking at these effects (goals) and trying to decide if "owning and riding extreme MTB" is net positive or net negative.

At WL7, I'm considering how MTB fits in to the rest of my life and goals.
  • I have a goal of going carfree, selling my truck. But I need to be able to transport my bike and gear to a trailhead in order to "do" FR/DH. So my bike is in conflict with this goal.
  • My "shelter" nodes are distributed, and none of them are adjacent to decent FR/DH trails. They also don't have much in the way of storage, or storage for tools/etc.
  • My transportation and shelter nodes relate to a "be seminomadic" holon goal, and "DH/FR mtb" just doesn't fit well into it, mostly due to the requirement for a truck, and storage space.
Also, I have other nodes in my life that contribute just as good or better to the positive effects of FR/DH. My motorcycle is arguably funner than my mtb, but it also serves as useful transportation between my shelter nodes, to the grocery store, etc all with a much lower carbon footprint that truck ownership. Climbing contributes positively to health and the risk of injury is actually lower. That, plus hiking and walking all contribute to health, being outdoors, social, and technical skill. I could go on.

So I have several other loosely-coupled nodes that yield the same or better positive effects as MTB, with fewer of the negative yields.

I could have decided to sell the MTB at a L6 level of thinking, but L7 makes it a no-brainer. Snip it.

Hristo Botev
Posts: 1734
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:42 am

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by Hristo Botev »

For my newly discovered strength training interest, I'm curious if a Mark Rippetoe type would be an example of a WL 7 or 8. So at the lowest level someone is out of shape, diabetic, dependent on drugs and expensive medical care, etc. etc. Then they get in to strength training by joining (and paying for) a strength training gym and perhaps a coach. They get healthier and stronger and get all the positive web-of-goal benefits of that, but they are still paying for a gym membership. Meanwhile they are reading a lot about strength training, which necessarily means reading a lot about how the human body works generally, which necessarily means understanding and practicing all sorts of other things, like diet and preventative care and rehabilitation. They keep their eyes out for strength training equipment on Craigslist, yard sales, friends who are moving/downsizing, etc., until they score their own garage/back yard equipment and they can get rid of the gym membership, though that means losing some of the community connections they made at the gym with folks sharing similar interests. But they build/maintain that community by inviting friends to use their home equipment. Interest grows to a point where the person is doing strength training coaching out of his garage; which then moves into a gym space; and then a book/podcast/youtube videos/etc. So now you've turned a positive/healthy hobby/activity into a revenue stream, but more importantly others are benefiting by virtue of being your employees, and your gym members and coachees, etc., as well as benefiting your community by sponsoring little league teams, community fundraisers, and the like, and otherwise being a good, local, independent, corporate member of your community. And at this point money is really only needed to pay your employees' salaries, and also as a small barrier to entry to ensure real interest among your gym's members and coachees, as a price of admission to ensure buy-in.

As another version of this, perhaps instead of scoring a used squat rack or whatever, they take a welding class and build their own. Which then turns into a business of sourcing steel and making and selling squat racks with repurposed steel.

Keeping things in the "Bro" realm of ERE for a second, see also the Gracie family's progression with Brazilian jiu jitsu, over generations.

User avatar
Alphaville
Posts: 3611
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by Alphaville »

zbigi wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 5:04 am
I've had similar thoughts when I listened to my 91 yo grandma describing her peasant life before she moved to the city. By many standards, she was an ERE god - skills through the roof (e.g. she wore only clothes she made herself, from her own linen or wool), living with almost no money (money was used only occasionally to buy stuff like salt or matches), was deeply embedded in a network of relationships in the village etc. At the same time, this life was a total misery and a constant struggle - for example, her mother got very sick when she was a teenager and she couldn't afford even one doctor's visit (mother got sick by working illegal jobs in a German farm across the border trying to make a little money to save for a cow), she was constantly hungry as a child (they didn't produce enough food for entire family, mostly due to not enough land), events like a family horse or cow getting sick were much more scarier than salaryman's car breaking down etc.
yup. i went into that life voluntarily! it was a good experiment and a learning experience but i had the skills and education to get back out. others are not so lucky. i've seen a lot of carnage in my time there. heartbreaking.
zbigi wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 5:04 am
Based on her stories, it seems to me that most important point of ERE is still the "retirement" part i.e. "don't be poor", while everything else is more of a solution for how to live well on a relatively little once you already have the money (which was indeed ERE's original focal point in the blog times I believe). Another doubtful element of ERE for me is that it's basically taking advantage of the system without fully participating in it (via paying regular consumer's amount of taxes) - doing ERE in a poor country (which was definitely Poland in my grandma's youth), where everybody pays little taxes and infrastructure and other state provided means of support are shoddy or non-existent, would be much harder than in a first world country. This makes it more of a temporarily valid "life hack" than a sustainable philosophy for me - on that note, I think even Jacob pointed out a couple of times that ERE is more of a transitional approach and, if it takes on and enough people start quitting jobs around the age of 30-35, the society and economy will undergo radical transformation and a new landscape, requiring new approaches, will emerge.
right, we moved backed out to avoid being "the renaissance poor." we're in a city now with work, salaries, benefits, side gigs, profitable hobbies... but also attempting to apply the lessons from the peasants and incorporate ere ideas into this phase of life, rather than salaryman convention.

we're not going to retire before retirement age--instead we "retired" super-super-early (prematurely?) and are now making up for it. but we actually love our situation, and doing this backwards.

i don't know enough to answer about the social effects, etc, which are highly unpredictable, plus the social sciences aren't my forte. there's also the scenario of ai "retiring us" whether we want or not :lol:

anyway, my criticism wasnt of ere per se, rather it was about constructing flawed models of it based on other theories.

i've moved my objections to this thread: viewtopic.php?f=21&t=11937 where i hope they lead to a fruitful discussion somehow.

Scott 2
Posts: 2825
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 10:34 pm

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by Scott 2 »

I love my time weight training and have zero intention of giving it up. But, I am conscious of how tremendously inefficient it is. The weight ends up exactly where it started. For all the energy expended, wear on the body, zero physical work is produced.

I've always a been aware of how ridiculous this is - I'll happily spend 90 minutes lifting weights. I might exhaust myself with a sled or a rowing machine. But, then I pay someone to clean my house or pick up my groceries. Energy burnt on exercise is obviously friction in the system.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

I kind of hate weight training and gyms, but I don’t entirely mind pushing a reel mower across 1/3 acre of rough grass. Highly recommend the newly patented Fiskars device as BIFL. Either it works great or my month straight of throwing demo trash into a dumpster has rendered me more Fit if not less Fat. OTOH, I do agree that it might take 4X as much time or even more at miscellaneous manual labor to gain some of the benefits of focused exercise. For instance, you would have to be pretty inventive with your gardening practice to come up with ways to lift 200 lbs.

BookLoverL
Posts: 294
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 4:17 pm
Location: England

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by BookLoverL »

Yeah, at the moment with exercise, I'm at the point where I think it's nicely possible to integrate cardio into transport needs without spending two hours a week jogging to nowhere on purpose, but I can't think of that many ways of integrating high-level strength work unless you're a professional furniture mover or something. About the furthest I've got (and this works for cardio as well) is that you can build social connections by performing the strength exercises at the same area as other people, and if you get good enough someone might pay you to train them in exercises. At least for me my strength exercise is free, since I now live near a park containing some adult outdoor gym equipment. So I can do all the bodyweight strength exercises I want, and that's the type I usually do anyway.
Last edited by BookLoverL on Wed Jan 12, 2022 12:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ertyu
Posts: 2893
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:31 am

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by ertyu »

@AH thank you for writing this out, this was a very clear explanation.

AxelHeyst
Posts: 2118
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by AxelHeyst »

It's relevant to the n, n+1, n+3 dynamic that when I explain my reasoning to nonERE folk, the common response is "oh but you love FR/DH!" They don't get it, and their eyes kind of gloss over during my explanation (which I take some pains to simplify from what I wrote up there).

guitarplayer
Posts: 1303
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2020 6:43 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by guitarplayer »

Vignette:

Growing season has recently started. It is difficult to produce sun cream from scratch (I think DW tried once). Easier to produce shade for face = have a sun hat. Easy to get from shop, but can be made. There is a weavery where I am and also have some experience with looms. I thought 'okay then, I am gonna weave a sun hat.' Went to youtube, seems like people make sun hats from straw or cane. So I went out to check out the bales that are on the field by the house - unfortunately this is hay, useless for the purpose. So I'm thinking what I can use. I have this old bed sheet and know that sometimes rugs are weaved from old textile ripped into thin stripes to be used instead of thread, oxfam sells them and in our weavery they also make them, look good. So I think 'well I will go with that'. My bits of bedsheet are white so will detract sunlight and will have a nice clean look rather than an old colorful t-shirt. Also this piece of bedsheet is now total waste sitting at the back of the cupboard and will only serve as food for moths and I don't want moths. But I need 8 pieces of something fairly bendable to weave the textile stripes around so that it will give the shape to the sun hat, and I don't see anything like that around.

1h later I go to put recycling rubbish in the big bin outside and I see those alu trays that are sometimes used to serve antipasti at conferences, events etc. I found them in a big kitchen in the community last year and used for drying mushrooms. I now have a dehydrator so they turned into waste for some time. They have a perfect bendability for making a sun hat. I am going to cut them into 16 stripes (I am making a hat for DW and I) and use as a scaffolding for weaving. The trays were rubbish already twice but turn back to work yet again. The old bedsheets were rubbish twice as well (we used piece of it for something else in Nov last year). Okay, this is a project, so need to report the results, but:

* two resources are fed back to the system
* I will practice dexterity skills as a break from and to counterbalance brainy studying maths
* will contribute to health (no sunburn or sunstroke)
* something handmade by me always looks prettier to me, I will be likely happy with the result (boost to self esteem)
* in a more roundabout way will contribute to growing some of my food and socialising

And since on the topic of gardening, preserving seeds I would see as level 7 in a nutshell. DW just told me that we have 50% germination rate on preserved seeds of broadbeans from last year which she recons is poor compared to the nearly 100% from the purchased seeds. I am like 'man that's no problem, save two times more seeds more and out of the supply chain forever!' It's going to be interesting to see how they fare vs the purchased ones.
Last edited by guitarplayer on Sat Apr 17, 2021 1:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

I think maybe if you could figure out how to pay your property tax with saved seeds that would be Level 8. Your weaving project sounds cool. I inherited my garden hat. It belonged to an old man, so not very pretty. I pretty thoroughly squashed my pretty straw hat, so I need to figure out how to reshape it.

white belt
Posts: 1452
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 12:15 am

Re: Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

Post by white belt »

Scott 2 wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 1:03 pm
I love my time weight training and have zero intention of giving it up. But, I am conscious of how tremendously inefficient it is. The weight ends up exactly where it started. For all the energy expended, wear on the body, zero physical work is produced.

I've always a been aware of how ridiculous this is - I'll happily spend 90 minutes lifting weights. I might exhaust myself with a sled or a rowing machine. But, then I pay someone to clean my house or pick up my groceries. Energy burnt on exercise is obviously friction in the system.
BookLoverL wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 1:51 pm
Yeah, at the moment with exercise, I'm at the point where I think it's nicely possible to integrate cardio into transport needs without spending two hours a week jogging to nowhere on purpose, but I can't think of that many ways of integrating high-level strength work unless you're a professional furniture mover or something. About the furthest I've got (and this works for cardio as well) is that you can build social connections by performing the strength exercises at the same area as other people, and if you get good enough someone might pay you to train them in exercises. At least for me my strength exercise is free, since I now live immediately opposite a park containing some adult outdoor gym equipment. So I can do all the bodyweight strength exercises I want, and that's the type I usually do anyway.
I'll bite on the weight training discussion since I am very familiar with it. First off, I haven't found a great way to integrate weight training in systems (well actually I partially have, but such systems are highly individual). For simplicity sake, I'm going to associate strength with big muscles and vice versa, although I understand there is a difference between the two and to a point they aren't always related.

I'll agree that I haven't cracked the nut on how to leverage all of the weights I'm moving into some kind of energy. It would be cool to have a way to attach a barbell to a flywheel or something and spin it as I move the weight. The closest thing I've seen to something like that was a concept on Low-tech magazine with a gym that powers an apartment building: https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2017/05 ... alone.html

Bodyweight exercises are great. Cardio is great and easily applicable to transportation methods. However strength is trickier, and it's possible to progress to level of strength and muscle in which bodyweight exercises cannot provide sufficient stimulus to cause useful adaptation.

Here are some benefits I've found from taking my weight training seriously:

-I work in a job where physical fitness is a part of job performance (the military), so being strong means I can score higher on physical fitness tests and further my career. There are lots of jobs that involve physical labor and don't pay well, so I suspect the trick here would be to find one that requires a combination of intelligence and physical strength, which is not a very common combination in my experience.

-Getting more muscular has improved my dating options dramatically (as a straight guy). I can attract more desirable women and I can leverage my dating options into other forms of capital (e.g. my <$500 a month studio doesn't have a washer, but I do my laundry for free every week at a girl's house). This weekend I'm going fishing with her family on a guided trip, so I'll gain fishing skills and lots of fish fillets to take home to eat. This girl would not have chosen me on a dating app if I didn't have muscles (she said it herself). Other social benefits emerge for a man who keeps attractive women around.

-Designing and following a program consistently builds lots of useful skills like discipline, time management, and stress management. My diet, sleep habits, and stress levels are all greatly improved because I know I need to optimize them in order to make progress with my lifting.

-Random people ask me fitness and health-related questions. I've taught a few people how to lift and given advice on programming (social capital?). I think there is a certain "wow" factor associated with being physically fit, particularly when it's combined with intelligence and other desirable qualities. This is harder to quantify concretely, but I suspect that it is the case that a more physically fit person will be perceived by others as more competent and confident in any area of life (this halo effect is well-established with conventionally attractive people).

Edit: Here's a bonus one. Almost any situation I encounter in daily life that requires strength is incredibly easy. I can pick people up, move heavy items, push cars in neutral, etc. In fact, I'm a terrible judge of when something is actually heavy for the average person because everything feels light to me.

Edit2: From a systems perspective, it wouldn't make sense to get rid of my $40 gym membership since I'm getting so much value from it in other realms of my life. I do kind of like @HB's example he gave, but then again that requires that one has a home with a garage, which depends a lot on the rest of an individual's web.

Post Reply