Systems!- Level 6 towards 7

[jennypenny]

I get that this is very WL6, and somehow these integrate later, but I don't see how yet and that's why I'm here at 6.

I agree that they become much more fluid and interchangeable 7+. That said, I think it's important (required?) to make sure all the types of capital you mentioned are well-developed before leveling up and using them interchangeably, otherwise the stronger types are always compensating for the deficiencies in other types, causing an imbalance and strain on the system. We all have strengths but they should be used to gain an added advantage or maybe for emergency needs, not wasted on filling holes we should have addressed in other ways.

[IlliniDave]

... I can call my friend to teach me how to fix the grill or look it up on youtube or pay someone to teach me how to fix it, or, in a pinch, pay someone to fix it or trade someone something to fix it or know someone who's grill I can use or....

Or you can [learn, if necessary, to ] build a fire and cook over it, which happens to be what I did when my last fancy-enough-to-actually-break grill went belly-up 9 years ago.

I suppose on the topic of various types of "capital" I'm much like I am about anything. I don't see the point of expending a lot of time and energy putting together a holistic life strategy broader than what is optimal for your own enjoyment and SWAN. Myself, as a fairy introverted introvert, maintaining a fat stash of social capital would make for a lifestyle I don't enjoy. Don't see a point in that. Living would dissolve to surviving.

However, I encourage all the extroverts out there so inclined to make hay with it. There's a lot of effort in the business world to shatter and ban the so-called good-ol'-boy networks, but in private life they can be quite effective. Expressions like, "It's not what you know, it's who you know," don't emerge in a vacuum.

[Ego]

I don't see the point of expending a lot of time and energy putting together a holistic life strategy broader than what is optimal for your own enjoyment and SWAN. Myself, as a fairy introverted introvert, maintaining a fat stash of social capital would make for a lifestyle I don't enjoy. Don't see a point in that. Living would dissolve to surviving.

Is it possible to learn to enjoy a fat stash of social capital in the same way someone learns to enjoy wine or enjoys playing tennis after they get the basics down?

The typical trajectory is for people to need increasing amounts of help as they age. That is not true for everyone but is true for most. A fat stash of social capital would be helpful to those people. Learning how to enjoy the thing that has a good chance of producing a future benefit seems prudent, no?

[Alphaville]

Is it possible to learn to enjoy a fat stash of social capital in the same way someone learns to enjoy wine or enjoys playing tennis after they get the basics down?

yeah, that's what parties are for.

maybe watch this movie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QsLt5sAleE

he's loaded. well, it's not just about parties... but like all great art, it's best to experience than to hear explanations.

[Ego]

....Moved to the social capital thread

[jacob]

Reminder:

There's a a dedicated thread for social capital/skill.

The mental snag between 6 and 7 is the unboxing or decompartmentalization of what was previously seen as separate capitals. From a whole-systems perspective these mental boxes are now seen as artificial constructs much like university departments are artificial constructs. Seeing them as individual capitals (or departments, like the money department, the social department, the technical department, ...) to be valued or optimizing prevents deep collaboration between departments.

In short:
WL5: Is this particular capital/effort worth it compared to how I value my life energy?
WL6: All capitals have inherent worth or yield and can't be ranked. Monday is money day. Tuesday is socializing day. Wednesday is ... I must do them all and avoid weak spots.
WL7: Yields, yields everywhere, how do I put them together? If I borrow a tool to grow a plant and save money was that social, financial, or technical capital? I don't know. It doesn't matter what I call it.

[IlliniDave]

Is it possible to learn to enjoy a fat stash of social capital in the same way someone learns to enjoy wine or enjoys playing tennis after they get the basics down?

The typical trajectory is for people to need increasing amounts of help as they age. That is not true for everyone but is true for most. A fat stash of social capital would be helpful to those people. Learning how to enjoy the thing that has a good chance of producing a future benefit seems prudent, no?

I liken it to financial or any other capital in a sense. To maximize financial capital would imply, for example, that I would not retire in 7 weeks or whatever, I'd keep at it. Social capital is similar. For some of us growing it is less pleasant than than getting up and going to work 40 or 60 hours a week. So much like financial capital, social capital has an 'enough' point. Or sort of like Jacob said below it all kind of melds together into life. Some people maybe wind up relying on social capital slightly more than another form, some slightly less.

Regarding introversion, I beat my head against the wall for decades hoping to correct my "why can't you just learn to be as social as normal people" flaw. Not everyone can force themselves to enjoy unpleasant things. I think masochists are born, now made. So I've got family, a handful of friends, and various acquaintances linked to various interests; and shortfall in that realm will have to be addressed by alternate means like any other shortfall.

[AxelHeyst]

WL7: Yields, yields everywhere, how do I put them together? If I borrow a tool to grow a plant and save money was that social, financial, or technical capital? I don't know. It doesn't matter what I call it.

Makes me think of how as you level up, it becomes increasingly irrelevant to categorize expenses into discrete buckets, and “budgeting” stops making much sense. E.g. Was the new chain for my bicycle transportation, health, or fun? Was the book on intensive gardening education, health, or food?

But what you said — “Seeing them as individual capitals ... to be valued or optimizing prevents deep collaboration between departments.” Clicked in my head that that’s not just an interesting shift in mindset to note, but that the old compartmentalized way of thinking is a mindset to be actively pruned. It suggests things I can do to actively encourage the mindset shift. Such as decommissioning the part of my tracking spreadsheet that forces me to assign very discrete categorizations to my spending. (And this example makes me think about how sometimes the best thing to do is a subtractive, rather than additive, change to my system).

[jacob]

Clicked in my head that that’s not just an interesting shift in mindset to note, but that the old compartmentalized way of thinking is a mindset to be actively pruned. It suggests things I can do to actively encourage the mindset shift.

I would caution against trying to fast track one's evolution by active pruning even if knowing the next step makes it tempting. Leveling up almost always comes from deep dissatisfaction with the present framework in that it's simply failing to solve a problem one has become aware of. It's basically like breaking through to another dimension (in the from 2D flatland to 3D). However, in order to do this successfully---and this is important---it requires, I think, one to have deeply and thoroughly explored one's present stage in order to discover why it's lacking.

Don't forget that the current stage was or should have been reached as a resolution/synthesis of issues with the previous one. It is therefore quite alright to spend time exploring a given stage. It's also alright never to leave insofar dissatisfaction never arises. I think that's more normal for most than not---which is why most of humanity is happy with WL2 or 3 for these personal finances. This happens at ALL levels, I practically guarantee it.

So I'm not sure I would encourage the active dissolution of the current stage insofar it is not developed to a complete and frustrating level yet if you know what I mean? Doing so would be like building castles in the air---only abstract theorizing. It might create a glimpse but it's not a durable situation. Like with the budget or the tracking ... think of them as training wheels. They will eventually come off but if they come off to quickly maybe you'll grow to think that riding a bike always involves crashing left and right instead of waiting to take them off when they're no longer helpful but rather more in the way of doing sharper corners. The fact that systems design will ultimately be seen like training wheels too might provide some incentive to not adopt it ASAP.

[AxelHeyst]

That does make sense, thank you.

[Alphaville]

I would caution against trying to fast track one's evolution by active pruning even if knowing the next step makes it tempting.

there is a difference between evolution and design though.

evolution takes its own path and can't be designed (it's not teleological). but the term "lifestyle design" posits that you can implement it from a set of instructions. eta: there's a third potion, which is a human one: given a known goal, you find your way there one step at a time/with smaller plans (e.g. this is the gtd methodology of "next action").

this relates to the clarity issues i perceived with the levels table--is it a log or a taxonomy or a manual? (the eco-level chart is a manual drawn up like a board game; this is possible because the end game is known, aka achieving "holzerhood").

Leveling up almost always comes from deep dissatisfaction with the present framework in that it's simply failing to solve a problem one has become aware of.

are there satisficer vs optimizer paths? can satisficers play?

[jacob]

Satisficing/optimizing is a stage. Trying to "play" the full range of development at a given stage is counterproductive.

Maybe compare to adult development models:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGItuEai8vo& [Watching from 3:15 to 16:40 will describe the intent and purpose of such models quite well and also explain why gaming it is a dumb idea.]

The Loevinger type table actually maps pretty well to the ERE WLs which is surprising given that I only learned about it a few months ago, but also validating since it implies that the ERE WLs are also mapping to the correct reality/territory and that 10 years of observing and classifying how people evolve or develop their thinking about money and life was actually sorted correctly.

Once again though, my aim is not to satisfy every nitpicking objection to the model. I'll leave that to the academics. Nor do I wish to make it idiot proof against abuse or misunderstandings. I made it. I find it useful enough to classify almost everybody (it is rarely wrong/I am rarely surprised). That is good enough for me to use and share it. But it's basically research-grade material, not enterprise- or commercial-grade. Thus it makes some demands on the operator.

[Alphaville]

is it teleological or open ended though?

--

eta this seems non-video source? http://www.cook-greuter.com/9%20levels% ... 1%2007.pdf

loevinger: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loevinger ... evelopment

--

eta2: i mean, for example, ontogeny is teleological--individual organisms have a developmental path. this path can be interfered with or mutated but generally the developmental blueprint is already hardcoded in the organism.

philogeny on the other hand is open-ended: we don't know what traits will be selected by the environmen or how future species may evolve.

the ego development models (like "holzerhood") being ontogenetic are described as converging towards predetermined results. it's developmental not evolutionary. authors know the end and the stages to get there.

[jacob]

Yes, but you should watch the video segment which is specifically ABOUT-THE-TABLE and not the table itself...

Incidentally it's very frustrating to argue this when you're asking questions (teleology) that were answered right above in another post. If threads are moving too fast for the smartphone, maybe slow down the response rate. All I can do is ignore the questions, but that risks other people thinking that I don't know the answers. It's pretty much a Gish gallop. Or maybe we'll make a rule that my answers will be exactly as long as your questions insofar I have to repeat myself?

[Alphaville]

Incidentally it's very frustrating to argue this when you're asking questions (teleology) that were answered right above in another post. If threads are moving too fast for the smartphone, maybe slow down the response rate.

oh lol i don't mean to peeve you, please carry on

[jacob]

Yeah, I'm peeved

[Quadalupe]

Satisficing/optimizing is a stage. Trying to "play" the full range of development at a given stage is counterproductive.

Maybe compare to adult development models:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGItuEai8vo& [Watching from 3:15 to 16:40 will describe the intent and purpose of such models quite well and also explain why gaming it is a dumb idea.]

Nice, a nice explanation that made total sense. You can't skip trig and algebra to go straight to calculus!

I also liked this part (based on the transcript, slightly edited for readability)

I do notice that some of you are falling into the trap that you have zero personal success in your life [...] and yet you're talking about enlightenment and awakening as though that is what you should be doing in your life. This is too much for you. You're biting off more than you can chew and the consequence of that is going to be that you're not going to you're not going to become this super advanced human. Rather you're going to stagnate and you're going to get very frustrated pursuing awakening when you don't have any sort of just basic survival foundation built up.

So I do recommend you focus quite a bit on the achiever stage make sure you exhaust the shit out of the achiever stage and you get everything out of it that you want or need that your ego craves.

Burn through that karma so that you can get beyond it. Get it out of your system. Because if you're stuck on sex and money and financial security, you know what enlightenment [will be]? There's not going to be any enlightenment for you.

For the leveling up in WL, the basic survival foundations at WL6 are skills, yields and flows (if I'm not mistaken). So rather than trying to develop a convoluted framework to tie it al together, first start by actually creating those foundations until it starts to chave. Then you can look at what the next stage can offer you to remove the chaving.

This also means that it's completely fine and natural to look at a naive way (from a higher WL point of view) to certain concepts and actions. It's not wrong, it's just the correct way of looking at things for the stage you're currently at.

[7Wannabe5]

One thing that somewhat confuses me about the sort of developmental model linked above is that it seems somewhat biased towards growth in what Ken Wilber would refer to as the masculine adult energy vs the feminine adult energy. For example, many years ago when my own children were quite young, I tutored math at a school that provided day care for teen mothers so that they could complete high school. It was quite obvious that some of the teenagers were mature enough to be “good enough” mothers and others weren’t. This level of maturity didn’t necessarily correlate very much with ability to progress in Algebra. And, I think most of us know a human or three who has “exhausted the shit” out of Achievement, but still might be lacking the thread of maturity necessary to be a “good enough” primary parent. I know my example offered is too literal and specific relative to the general model, but I have dated a lot of men who did not grow into their “maternal energy” until they were in their 40s, and this is simultaneously amusing and annoying to someone who was “changing diapers” at age 10, and making decisions about health insurance for not yet born child at 22.

[Jin+Guice]

So far we've discussed the different types of capital, which if I understand this correctly is the stock, but we haven't much discussed what different yields and flows look like. I'm not sure I understand what a flow is.

I'm wondering about this bc I'm quite oversupplied on certain yields (money*, food, places to sleep), but less confident about their sustainability and sometimes undersupplied on other yields. One of the advantages of liquid financial capital over others is it easy transformation into whatever you need/ want. I'm also concerned about the sustainability/ resilience/ adaptability of my yields.

*Is it possible that money is a stock, yield and flow?

[jacob]

Stock: Something you have. (e.g. cash)
Yield: Something you get from something you have. (e.g. interest on the yield obtaining from investing)
Flow: Something you have that goes to some other thing. (e.g. spending the yield or the capital)

Stock tends to be nouns. Flows tend to be verbs.