A Jacob Mention

Simple living, extreme early retirement, becoming and being wealthy, wisdom, praxis, personal growth,...
User avatar
Lemur
Posts: 1612
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 1:40 am
Location: USA

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by Lemur »

Alphaville - if you're reading this. Thanks for all your contributions over the years! I learned quite a bit from your posts. You will be missed. Definitely one of my favorite posters! I'm actually surprised to see you only joined in 2019...seems you're in just about every thread ;)

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

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by IlliniDave »

jacob wrote:
Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:21 pm

ERE is the (faster, better) type of product which means it's not cheap and as such it is the least popular combination. To "pay" you have to integrate years or even decades of knowledge ...
Sorry Jacob, but I got a chuckle out of this (ERE = faster, ERE costs years or decades). I totally get where you are going with the analogy and agree it is a good one. But it's hard to follow when I have to remember how fast is now cost and how much cost is now time. :)

As one of the longstanding forum heretics, I'll apologize again for whatever angst I've caused. When I first stumbled onto ere I was on a mission to streamline/simplify the "business" side of my life. I'd come to the conclusion that less stuff and less need for ongoing outflow would indeed streamline (i.e., lower) my ongoing need to import resources (i.e., slog to the office for a paycheck). Seemed like a match made in heaven. That my goal was to drive the need for resource importing to zero caused me to miss the point which, as it seems to me, is to drive the need for resource importing low enough that it can be done essentially without more than token reliance on money, but not without work. Despite what they told me my IQ* is, it wasn't until the ereWLs came out that I realized I'm headed** in a different direction despite a lot of overlap at the trailhead, and had it all wrong from the beginning. I'm lazy by nature and my longer-term goal at that time was to eliminate the work part of my engineering triangle.

*Full disclosure: I've always been highly skeptical of the accuracy of that number because I can be as dense as the trunk of a maple tree.

**Really, the idealization of where I'm headed because in practice I seem to be falling well short of my goals especially involving simplicity.

I really did want to understand the bottom rows of the ereWL table. Not so much that I wanted to become a SME across all the rows and columns (I don't have decades to dedicate), but I did want a better-than-fuzzy understanding of where it's headed.

At this point in time I'll pause and say I don't want anyone to waste their time trying to rehash the topic. It'll simmer in my subconscious and some day I'll have an epiphany, or maybe not. I'm committed to the path I've laid out and it'll take all I can muster for the next few years to see it through. It happens to be mostly orthogonal to the advancing axes of ere.

This is really an after-the-fact attempt to put context to things I've said in the past. I'll be more mindful of what I say going forward. I tend to think, "These people know me so they'll be able to use their iDave filter to understand what I'm saying." I think that was a bad assumption.

daylen
Posts: 2528
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am
Location: Lawrence, KS

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by daylen »

In theory, that science mojo shouldn't have anything to do with how the scientist comes off; in practice, it almost always does, especially for those who cannot grok the mojo beyond surface-level appearance.

ERE is fast in the sense that it would probably encourage us to get on with it already.. just go embody your philosophy already!

I am being playful by the way.. or rather.. is the neo-ERE philosophy being playful..?.. :? 8-)
Last edited by daylen on Thu Jun 17, 2021 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ZAFCorrection
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 3:49 pm

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by ZAFCorrection »

I think the claims of elitism get a little more salient in the case where the topic gets shoehorned within the constraints of a certain field and then the mojo is invoked. The mojo may be real. Often the insistence that the topic only be treated within the framework of that mojo is less justifiable. Not saying that is happening here and now, but it is a failure mode amongst the science folks.

daylen
Posts: 2528
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am
Location: Lawrence, KS

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by daylen »

Part of what may be seen as an insistence on treating topics within a framework is a defensive response to the rise of another movement of thought/commentary that tends to neglect frameworks altogether(*). For frameworks to stand they must stand for or with something that persist through counter-movements in the social sphere of influence. Else, the very structures underlying the fabric of our society unravel.

This is not an excuse to give up, and really should be a motivator to try harder on all fronts. Pushing any one of these fronts too quickly usually ends up distorting the overall signal of X or Y movement, thus lowering its viability in the overall social sphere in the long run(**). Meme-systems that do not develop a few defense mechanisms [or otherwise merge with some other system] will get replaced/overwritten by systems that do within a few cultural generations.

(*) hence my comment before on holons which are required to start building something with layers/depth.

(**) though in the short run many of the one and two front pushes are being re-commodified and re-indexed into oblivion. :P

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15906
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by jacob »

daylen wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 4:15 pm
Part of what may be seen as an insistence on treating topics within a framework is a defensive response to the rise of another movement of thought/commentary that tends to neglect frameworks altogether(*).
It's hard for Green to perceive the difference between Orange and Yellow.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6357
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by Ego »

daylen wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 3:32 pm
ERE is fast in the sense that it would probably encourage us to get on with it already.. just go embody your philosophy already! :)
Interesting. I wonder if philosophy/embodiment is part of the problem. Those who read the book to learn the philosophy and then embodied it seem to enjoy more philosophizing. Those of us who were already doing it and discovered that Jacob's philosophizing fit with our experiences are less enthusiastic about more (WL, MB) philosophies. Yes? No?

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15906
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by jacob »

In science each advancement expands understanding (theory) by subsuming what was previously understood into a more comprehensive theory. For example, in dynamics General Relativity explains everything that Special Relativity does and then some. Likewise SR explains everything that Newton did and then some. Indeed, Newton is a special (low speed) case of SR which is a special (GM/2R->0) case of GR. This creates a hierarchy of insight. GR is not elitist because it's better at explaining movement than Plato.

Conversely, according to the postmodern perspective which dominates much of academia and a good deal of the current culture at large, all these theories are just "narratives" and no narrative is better or worse than any other narrative. The hierarchy is flat. Insisting that GR is better than Newton is considered elitist.

These are two wildly different ways of perceiving the world. They are the very antithesis of each other. To reconcile them the latter must accept that explanation Z really is better than explanations X and Y insofar Z explains X+Y. The former must accept that knowing Z does not necessarily mean that Z is a good explanation. After all Z might be wrong (this is how modernism died). However, if Z is wrong, then X and Y are wrong too. After all Z transcends and explains both. In other words, the conclusion would be that X, Y, Z are all wrong --- not all equally good.

In short, postmodernism threw the hierarchy-baby out with the bath water. But the problem was not the hierarchy. It was what humans did with the hierarchy.

Realizing this does not mean that there can not be haughty individuals who understand none of the above insist on applying X-theory on Y-problems w/o realizing that they need Z-theory to do so. OTOH, it also does not prevent inquisitive cranks from trying to overturn Z-theory with various X-theory questions not realizing that the answers have already been incorporated.---A strategy often used in climate denialism, e.g. "It's the sun", "It's the clouds", ...

Anyhoo... for science in general and also for the ERE WL table, each new stage includes everything learned in the previous stage. This means that late stages are enormously much larger in terms of perspectives and experiental knowledge than the early stages. I think this is often forgotten. Not grokking this is what leads to 1) demands for short and clear explanations of the late stages---it can be short or clear but not both; and 2) the idea that one can effectively skip a stage.

guitarplayer
Posts: 1299
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2020 6:43 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by guitarplayer »

daylen wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 4:15 pm
For frameworks to stand they must stand for or with something that persist through counter-movements in the social sphere of influence. Else, the very structures underlying the fabric of our society unravel.
And then Carse would say that we play in the cultural rather than social realm which is actually the whole point.

guitarplayer
Posts: 1299
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2020 6:43 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by guitarplayer »

Ego wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:19 pm
Those of us who were already doing it and discovered that Jacob's philosophizing fit with our experiences are less enthusiastic about more (WL, MB) philosophies. Yes? No?
Maybe moderately correlated? I would place myself in the latter group but still enjoy reading about the WL developments for example.

daylen
Posts: 2528
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am
Location: Lawrence, KS

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by daylen »

Not so sure about how reading or not reading the book plays in, but from a type perspective, the bifurcation between pulling and pushing appears descriptive of the Alphaville phenomenon. ERE is a more push-oriented approach. NTJ's, or gamma quadra types more generally, are hyper-aware of pushing movements. Members of the forum with a more pull-oriented approach will generally prompt more open-ended discussion but this can become quite tiresome for pushers who employ a more take it or leave it approach.

Pulling a system apart is great for seeing what all the components are but not that great if the components cannot be pulled back together again. That is what pushing things into place tends to do.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6357
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by Ego »

daylen wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:52 pm
Pulling a system apart is great for seeing what all the components are but not that great if the components cannot be put back together again. That is what pushing is for.
Funnily enough the idea came to me when Jacob posted about the Fixation book. I saw it and immediately thought that I'd rather read the Fixit log where Sclass and others are actually fixing things rather than reading about the philosophy of fixing things. I guess I am a puller.

daylen
Posts: 2528
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am
Location: Lawrence, KS

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by daylen »

Pushers see what parts matter by throwing things against a wall or watching others do similar. :)

Joking, that is what novice pushers do. Advanced pushers throw small stuff at other small stuff and call it particle physics.... okay, that was mean, but I couldn't resist. :lol:

daylen
Posts: 2528
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am
Location: Lawrence, KS

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by daylen »

If you're feeling pulley, it may be because I pulled you over to the pullseye. If you can sympathize with Alphaville then you can sympathize with pulling as a byproduct of scarce attention.

Though, the scarcity of attention is also hand in hand with incompleteness or partial wholes and can become but just a faint signal through the encapsulation of incompleteness within the concept of a part/whole or holon which can locally/contextually complete or short-circuit an indeterminate chain.
Last edited by daylen on Sat Jun 19, 2021 1:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6357
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by Ego »

Last week I visited family and we had a party. Some neighbors dropped by. One member of my family is very knowledgeable about nutrition. Legitimately knowledgeable. He is also obese. He does not hesitate to share his wisdom with others. The neighbors, whom he just met, were on the receiving end of his wisdom.

I cringingly sympathized with the neighbors. I did not sympathize with Alphaville. Toward the end of his time here he taught me that the ignore function works quite well.

There are some recurring topics here that make me feel similar to how I felt when my relative was lecturing the neighbors. In both cases I was/am a guest so who am I to complain?

daylen
Posts: 2528
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am
Location: Lawrence, KS

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by daylen »

Oh, I can reframe. If you can sympathize with pulling as an abstract pattern of attention then you can better sympathize with where he was coming from at least. Even if it didn't always seem to be with good intention. Sympathizing with the other is the first step towards compatibility with the other. If the green trend is to continue, then the ERE movement or we the ERE movement can gradually learn to sympathize with it in order to better handle its pull and to better push ourselves into it.

False legitimacy may be a symptom of something deeper and more pervasive. One modelling pathway involves an extreme indexicality where the lines between identities and accounts blur as references build on references on references.. loosing oneself in the references is an easy trap to habitually pull oneself into.. thus loosing track of what others may or may not associate with them (e.g. credentials or body size).

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15906
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by jacob »

Ego wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:19 pm
Interesting. I wonder if philosophy/embodiment is part of the problem. Those who read the book to learn the philosophy and then embodied it seem to enjoy more philosophizing. Those of us who were already doing it and discovered that Jacob's philosophizing fit with our experiences are less enthusiastic about more (WL, MB) philosophies. Yes? No?
Yes. In general, WL, MBTI, models, maps,... any schema is just a learning tool for a conscious transition from incompetence to competence. They're not much use outside of that window. Only those between the white belt and the black belt are interested in formal structures. Outside of this interval, there's little interest. Those who already know fighting don't need it. Those who aren't interested in fighting don't want it. The doesn't mean, though, that formalizing it is useless.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6357
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by Ego »

jacob wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 9:12 pm
The doesn't mean, though, that formalizing it is useless.
I agree. It can be very useful. And if anyone is doing the formalizing it should be you. You have done and continue to do the practice. And you have a mind for formalizing.

Those with little experience and especially those with a string of failures under their belt may be tempted to spend time participating in the formalization of a subject as a way to avoid actual practice. A tool is only as good as how it is used. That goes for the process of tool making as well.

daylen
Posts: 2528
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am
Location: Lawrence, KS

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by daylen »

I think that part of the beauty of ERE as a community, philosophy, practice, and so forth is that it is open to collaboration with compatible formulations outside of its current social mirror. Hence, we can all contribute to ERE by contributing to ourselves, and each of us can formalize ourselves with the aid of this social mirror for others to follow as we pass into doing.

User avatar
Seppia
Posts: 2016
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 9:34 am
Location: South Florida

Re: A Jacob Mention

Post by Seppia »

I love this forum.
I'm sorry I'm not adding to the conversation , but wanted to say thanks for the great exchanges ladies and gents.

Post Reply