My main lesson of 2011, when I naively tried to popularize ERE, was that I should stick to my sphere. Insofar I were to leave my sphere, I should understand not only the direction of departure but also how far away from the my sphere I was going.7Wannabe5 wrote: ↑Sat May 11, 2024 10:43 amA minor "ah-ha" moment I had recently was realizing that Fe-Style Compassion could be spreadsheeted under the realm of Personal Finance in the form of a Non-Profit and this would make it easier to "sell" ERE to those with Fe further up their stack. Very similar to how somebody who is running a small business to provide the small cash flow they need to support extremely frugal lifestyle expenses (as I did) would segregate business expenses from personal expenses. Obviously, when somebody is deriving their income from investments, their business expenses still exist, but are integrated at a further remove. I was also thinking that the creation of such a Non-Proit could almost represent the imaginary transfer of resources (whether fish, fishing pole, or concept of a fishing pole) that would bring those who are currently below 1 Jacob/year in spending due to poverty (PPP= $12,000/capita if spent in the U.S.) up to that level. The Little Carl I currently tutor would certainly qualify, because there's no way in hell the family of 5 he belongs to brings in over $60,000/year. When I suggested that he might not be familar with coins, because his parents use a card at the store, he told me his family gets food from the free store.
When the ERE book came out talking about living well on $7000/year, a common suggestion was how this could be used to solve the "problem" of poverty. It took me six months to realize that not only was I not the right messenger (youngish privileged white dude, these days middle-aged white dude, which is pretty much the worst or least cute, as you might put it, category on the planet in this day and age, so still a hard no) but ERE in its inchoate form of a 10+ year DIY self-study in personal competence (the renaissance man trope) was not the right message for the poverty demographic to get out of poverty (even the word "man" in renaissanceman caused brains unable to abstract the principle from word "man" to any person to glitch, even to this day). IOW, lesson 1: the message---even if it a good one---often requires translation.
Another lesson that came several years later was realizing that whether some people agree with anything depends less on whether the argument is good but whether you're part of their in-group or their out-group. The whole Kegan experience, especially Kegan3 #mindblown In other words, I realized that regardless of how useful anything I say may be, if I'm deemed part of the out-group, my message will be overriden by some memetic crapola from the in-group. Conversely, if I was part of the in-group, I could say insane things and people would take it at face value. Like "did you know that free power can be generated by plugging an extension cord into itself as long as you plug another power cord into one of the free spaces?". (science: this does nothing other than make a mess and create a fire hazard. social: humans gotta human). IOW, lesson 2: even a good message often requires the right person to say it.
So I've long (for the past 6-8 years anyway) given up on the idea that some "grand theory of everything" can provide a universal solution to the metacrisis. Instead I see its resolution as an extraordinarily complex path-dependent process. The best I or anyone can do is to find the leverage points where THEY ARE THE RIGHT MESSENGER WITH THE RIGHT MESSAGE AT THE RIGHT TIME IN THE RIGHT PLACE. IOW, lessons 3&4: even if you found the right message and the right messenger, people have to be ready to listen and in a position to act on it.
I see the metacrisis as a sick ecology of ideas that requires point-by-point interventions in order to transform it into something more healthy. I'm not particularly enthused about any proposal that doesn't get all 4 "RIGHT"s right. Obviously, I can't always be in the right place and time. Becoming a different messenger is very difficult---I can't change my skin, age, gender, resume, ... So basically, that leaves me with trying to figure out where/when/who/why to insert the message(s) I do have.
PS: I realize that saying "can't change" is a strong word and that I can change some of that. However, the ROI of that kind of change may not be worthwhile. It might even be negative. For example, I could have a child in order to show that ERE is possible with children so as to shut up those who dismiss ERE for anyone with children. And so on. I think I've already done enough on that front in terms of "living" different situations. Much easier to find a "messenger with children" to convince those who prioritize the messenger over the message.