Meeting, Engaging and Seducing non-ERE Allies: Carrot Vectors

[guitarplayer]

Less here. If it wasn't for having experienced this once (and I really mean just once), I would be inclined to believe that HH wasn't even a real thing. (In terms of all the enneagrams, I score the lowest on 2.)

I would be willing to bet five dollars that this has to do with helping that other researcher from another field by employing methods from astrophysics.

[jacob]

I would be willing to bet five dollars that this has to do with helping that other researcher from another field by employing methods from astrophysics.

That one incident was actually from holding DW's head while she was puking her migrained brains out. You can paypal my winnings

It's useful to distinguish between help in the form of solutions (Te) and help in the form of empathy (Fe).

"It's not about the nail" shows the difference very well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4EDhdAHrOg

The Helper's High relates to the latter. I suppose it requires X to register/mirror the emotions of Y and thus experience a deeper connection. It's the emotional analog to establishing a connection via reason e.g. "X understands and accepts the solution Y is giving". As the video illustrates, cross-helping doesn't work very well and is rarely appreciated. This goes both ways.

To bring the thread back on track, there exists non-ERE allies, who are not as interested in solutions as they are in having someone listen to [how they feel about] their problems while resisting the temptation to present solutions.

[shaz]

J+G, for the artists and musicians in your circle, is it too simplistic to pitch ERE as "fewer distractions from your art/passion?"

[ertyu]

also to artists: diy as opportunity for artistic expression and making your space full of art
j+g even has example, the suits
there's also art styles that focus on using post-consumer stuff as raw material. trash sculptures come to mind but that doesn't have to be all of it. the sculpture doesn't necessarily need to be a sculpture only, in the sense of, it doesn't just need to sit there in order to sit there and be looked at, it could have an utilitarian purpose, too
what other diy do you do, j+g?

[jacob]

To bring the thread back on track, there exists non-ERE allies, who are not as interested in solutions as they are in having someone listen to [how they feel about] their problems while resisting the temptation to present solutions.

And there exists non-ERE allies, who are not as interested in the message, as they are in the messenger.

Humans that convince themselves that they were incorrect after hearing/reading/seeing a correct argument from a random person are actually rather rare. They're mainly found in places that deal with interobjective reality, such as coding, science, accounting, ... which it is not only important to have a factual understanding of reality but also the ability to share it with others (so no idiosyncratic tips of the trade).

As such, maybe we've been having this discussion in a bubble of trying to find the exact "reasonable argument" to present to whichever group while failing to take the subjective and intersubjective operation of the other humans.

J+G, for the artists and musicians in your circle, is it too simplistic to pitch ERE as "fewer distractions from your art/passion?"

Yes, my experience with the public and what I've seen of others pitching the same message is that pitches don't work very well.

"Show, don't tell"... but do it in a way that the receiver can relate and see themselves in your place. Most humans want to mimic and/or anti-mimic other humans. For example, I've famously been dismissed for wearing the wrong clothes. To me clothing is a distraction. To others, clothing is so important that it forms much of their identity. Some even feel like a different person when they change it: "This is my serious suit. This is my party shirt. This is my uniform..."

In some domains, the correct clothes (lawyers and businessmen?) is maybe 75% (random number) of what is being communicated. Some people will gladly pay $2000 for a weekend seminar of trivialities and nonsense as long as it's presented by someone in a fancy suit driving a fancy car. A better version of the message might be available from a student borrowing a room at the local library, but these people would not even show up for that. (Place holder reserved for a snarky comment about Ted talks.)

On a more microscopic level, some will listen more (and better) if a message is communicated with passion. In other cases, people will listen more if they like you or if you're part of their group or even a group. Also see Asch experiment.

But good news... if you're part of an Artists-Community, some of these channels, which are closed to me, are open to you. You wear the right clothes. You talk in the right way. You're part of the in-group. You make art which they can understand/relate to(*).

(*) Conversely, there are very few humans who relate to the finer details of woodworking. A handcut mitered dovetail is meh. Slather three layers of poly on some crappy wood that came out of a barn door and it's ooh and aah. But so it goes ...

The problem is that some of these "channels" do not allow the communication of behavioral change. (In some cases, that is by design.) For example, some families "do not talk about money" or some families "do not read". The question which has persisted in this thread is how to open these channels.

Another strategy (The Harry Browne "How I found Freedom in An Unfree World") strategy is to simply put yourself out there without changing a thing about yourself. This is time eventually draws like-minded people to you. (time * increased probability = eventual success). This method is available now that we have the internet. Previously, people would have to leave the valley, go to the big city, and make themselves known. It is much easier now.

In between the two---to connect them---there's the strategy I presented in Stoa2. In practice, if you want to communicate a message, you can do it in the following order.
1) Put a megaphone on the internet (e.g. blog)
2) Attract people, who understand the message.
3) Help these people become different messengers (e.g. their own blogs, podcasts, journals, ...) with their own megaphone.
4) Create synergies between these groups (forums, blogging networks, ...)
5) ???

In some ways, you can model this as an epidemic with people being more or less susceptible to infection depending on which channels are open.

Add: This meta-strategy is still very much "on the internet", that is, it's a big-world-attraction strategy rather than a small-valley-convincing strategy. I've been much more effective with the former than the latter. For example, my family with the exception of DW and my parents still have no idea what ERE is about and strangely little interest in finding out.

[7Wannabe5]

But good news... if you're part of an Artists-Community, some of these channels, which are closed to me, are open to you. You wear the right clothes. You talk in the right way. You're part of the in-group. You make art which they can understand/relate to(*).

This really is not true of the artists I know. For instance, my sister's BF is a semi-famous musician (according to Wikipedia), probably a musical genius (I am not musical enough to judge, but my sister who is writing a symphony in her spare time thinks he is.) One of his early recordings was just re-released on a German label, so I asked him if he was going to go on tour, and he laughed and said "No, because the tour would consist of maybe 5 alterntive jazz clubs in the U.S. where my music would be appreciated." He supplements the income he derives from his art with a very small trust fund (his grandfather was a famous scientist) and doing gardening work in the summer, and renting out the second bedroom in his very small house.

[jacob]

This really is not true of the artists I know.

Maybe not in anecdotal specifics, but in general for other people, other areas than art, and shared interests, ...

[7Wannabe5]

I sincerely believe that you are making the same mistake confusing genuine artists and Level Green thinkers with their fans and/or popularizers that one of them would be making in confusing you with some generic engineer who occasionally posts on MMM or somebody in a Dave Ramsay audience. Genuine Artists (towards infp)are every bit as introverted and weird as Genuine Scientists. My artist sister was arrested and jailed, because her performance art was so unacceptable to the general public. Genuine artists aren't motivated by popularity. They're motivated by the desire to express their emotional and aesthetic truth. They'r only likely to be popular/successful to the extent that they match some median level of taste or get lucky. For instance, Thomas Kincade or Danielle Steele.

[jacob]

Lets ensure we're talking about the same goal then. Is the carrot for the "genuine" or the "generics"?

[7Wannabe5]

@jacob:

If Jin+Guice's friend/family circle corresponds to mine in terms of High IQ Cuckoo Bananas, then the carrot would be for the "genuine." However, my note would be the eNTPs such as Jin+Guice and myself tend more towards being popularizers/collaborators ourselves. More likely to own an art gallery, deal in rare books, run a small indie recording studio, write journalistic articles about scientific discoveries, etc. etc. than to hide away for months alone in a garret composing a symphony or solving a mathematical puzzle.

[Western Red Cedar]

Genuine artists aren't motivated by popularity. They're motivated by the desire to express their emotional and aesthetic truth. They'r only likely to be popular/successful to the extent that they match some median level of taste or get lucky. For instance, Thomas Kincade or Danielle Steele.

This concept of genuine artists sounds like BS to me. Are we supposed to intuitively gage their motivations as an outsider? Is Scorsese a genuine artist? How about Robert Rodriguez? What about Andy Warhol or Charlie Parker? Should we judge John Lennon differently based on his motivations in 1961 vs. 1971?

Van Gogh is a good example of someone driven by a desire to express his emotional and aesthetic truth, but the letters to his brother reveal that he was bothered by his lack of sales and commercial success.

Personal evolution is a critical component of art IMO, so the motivations and drive of artists are likely to change.

I think @Jacob was getting at the fact that different groups and cultures have different means of communication and signaling. This is certainly true in the arts IMO. I just returned from a lecture on the intersection of economic development, community development, art, and preserving cultural space. One of the points emphasized was the value of a cultural or linguistic background that stems from experience with different backgrounds and the ability to use the vernacular of that group in the appropriate context. .

[Western Red Cedar]

Yes, financial security, stability, and independence *are* the current primary carrots of ERE. Do you think that those are the only appropriate carrots for post-consumerism?

These definitely aren't the only appropriate carrots for post-consumerism. I do think, however, that the ERE lexicon is heavily intertwined with economics, so a radically different approach or perspective may be necessary to appeal to potential allies that are naturally turned-off by discussions of finance or economics..

Health is an intriguing carrot that could be almost as enticing as financial security. As I was reading a collection of essays by Katy Bowman it struck me that she was emphasizing a systems approach to lifestyle design, but with movement and personal health as the primary focus or node. She critiqued consumerism and the industrial economy, but predominantly from a viewpoint of how it limits our mobility and serves as a detriment to our health. She dropped subtle arguments about ecological responsibility and personal freedom, but in a much different manner than presented in the ERE book. She adopted the persona of a quirky mom and writes in a much different style.

----

This argument from @Jacob is actually where I've landed in terms of personal discussions:

I think people are unfortunately very rarely swayed by a logical argument - particularly when it comes to behavioral change or lifestyle decisions. I will add that people do seem to respond to stories. One of the reasons I suspect this forum is successful at attracting people from a variety of backgrounds is that the journals provide stories with which people relate or aspire towards.

[7Wannabe5]

This concept of genuine artists sounds like BS to me. Are we supposed to intuitively gage their motivations as an outsider?

Yes, I think it is possible to intuitively gauge motivation, unless you believe the person in question is entirely delusional. I don't for a minute believe that Jacob chose to study physics primarily for the money (because I believe him to be highly rational), and I don't believe for a minute that my sister was primarily financially motivated when she wrote a punk rock opera about intelligent ants invading Earth (because I believe her to be at least somewhat rational.) I do believe that Jacob was at least moderately financially motivated in his desire to learn about finance and investing, and I do believe that my sister is primarily financially motivated at her day job doing contract law, although she also finds it moderately interesting. There is such a thing as passion or primarily intrinsic motivation or stoke/flow. My sister has to make deals with herself along the lines of "I am only allowed to play piano for two hours in the morning." It's not difficult to realize that she loves the activity for itself.

One of the points emphasized was the value of a cultural or linguistic background that stems from experience with different backgrounds and the ability to use the vernacular of that group in the appropriate context. .

I agree that this is relevant.

[Ego]

(*) Conversely, there are very few humans who relate to the finer details of woodworking. A handcut mitered dovetail is meh. Slather three layers of poly on some crappy wood that came out of a barn door and it's ooh and aah. But so it goes ...

This is actually a very good analogy for this thread.

If no one sees the beautifully hand cut, mitered, dovetail, but a hundred people - many of whom are the target audience for conversion - enjoy a meal around the table with three layers of slathered poly on crap wood AND see for themselves what can be accomplished by being a decomposeur.... then which accomplished the larger goal?

Later, when the guests go to IKEA and imagine holding their own dinner party around one of tables offered there, they just.might consider other options before making the purchase. Or not.

[Sclass]

Genuine Artists (towards infp)are every bit as introverted and weird as Genuine Scientists.

+1 @7W. My experience with real artists is that they were nuts. Some were really hard to get a long with. Like hardcore STEM people are hard to get a long with but in a different way. To put it nicely “bananas”. Maybe like the STEM nerds half of their existence is in their heads.

The thought of getting these people (the ones I know) together and doing some kind of collaboration makes my eyes roll. The one thing they have in common is they work alone.

My recollection with both groups was the higher the level of genius the more difficult the relationship. The weaker ones worked well in communal environments.

I lived many years with a jewelry designer. She was crazy. But she has a knack for creating beauty. I think we connected because I was strong on the industrial arts side and she liked borrowing equipment from me…and I maintained her Janky tools. But to this day (she’s 80) everyone who could has abandoned her out of self defense.

[jacob]

@Ego - This is why the Wheaton scales are a thing with the implied [pedagogical] strategy of "meeting" each person in a way that is "inspiring" to them rather than "too extreme". This also means that while glossed up planks are inspiring to those why never held a paint brush, it takes a dovetail to inspire the glosser. Everyone in this "chain of being" thus serve a function.

I see this thread as acknowledging that the ERE language seems to work only on a small part of the demographics. Not because people are different in degree, but because they are different in kind. There does seem to be some confusion as to whether it's best to figure out how to draw a map of the entire world or whether it's better to figure out one's personal neighborhood. This depends on what someone wants. If you're writing a piece for a newspaper, it's better to have a big map of general characteristics. If you're talking to someone you know, it's better to know them as a unique person.

[Western Red Cedar]

@7W5 - My last post was too aggressive and direct. I apologize. The notion of a genuine artist or a true artist hits a bit of a nerve as I think that description of art discourages people (including a young WRC) from making art. It puts the artist on a pedestal. In my mind, it is similar to the notion that one needs to wait for inspiration or a muse to create art.

Art is both a process and a product. Art is broad. The experience with the process may vary with different mediums. Sometimes art is a craft, and it requires putting reps in when you don't feel like it. This is particularly true for big projects that can take months or years to make. Projects that might include dozens or hundreds of people.

I'm more comfortable with the concept of a serious artist or a professional artist. The serious artist realizes that they can't always wait for the muse. They get to work and practice their craft, even when they don't feel like it.

[7Wannabe5]

I think the thing that is most frustrating to me is that many of my friends/family just view my expression of ERE as me going through the typical Green political/ecological activism phase they went through in their 20s/early 30s, but I didn't have time for because I had kids early. For instance, my younger sister who hung out with the people who lived in the trees on the West Coast in the 90s and sometimes brattily referred to me as The Breeder during that era is now obsessed with keeping a job that provides her with full dental coverage. Her current take on ecological activism might be summed up as "Nothing works. Humans suck."

My own adult children are also oddly hard sells in some ways because they grew up under my frugal regime. So, it's like each of them picked a random 50% of my frugal practices to adopt and another random 50% to totally reject. For instance, they were apparently semi-traumatized from the embarassment of showing up in the school lunchroom with the odd lunches I might have packed. etc. etc. My DS34 is an INTP, so approximating the right type, and he does not own a car, spends zero money on haircuts or professional beard trimming, and still wears t-shirts that I bought him at a thrift store when he was 14, but when I was recently trying to convince him to learn how to cook some more healthy, frugal meals, he just said very firmly "Mom, here's what I like. I like to go to a restaurant. I like to tell the waitress what I want to eat. I like for somebody else to cook the food. I like for the waitress to bring me the food. I like to leave the dishes on the table for somebody else to clear." Mike drop.

The notion of a genuine artist or a true artist hits a bit of a nerve as I think that description of art discourages people (including a young WRC) from making art.

I like spirited debate. No worries. I would note that my "genuine" artist sister and her "genuine" artist BF are constantly encouraging less-than-talented-me to do art with them with sometimes quite hilarious results. So, I actually think it might be the posers/critics who create those sort of discouraging boundaries rather than the "genuine" artists themselves. This could maybe even be more broadly extended in surmise that anybody who is genuinely passionate/engaged in a pursuit is generally happy to attempt to integrate/initiate others.

[Bicycle7]

but when I was recently trying to convince him to learn how to cook some more healthy, frugal meals, he just said very firmly "Mom, here's what I like. I like to go to a restaurant. I like to tell the waitress what I want to eat. I like for somebody else to cook the food. I like for the waitress to bring me the food. I like to leave the dishes on the table for somebody else to clear." Mike drop.

This made me laugh it reminds me of my INTP friend that I've been talking about ERE with for the past couple of years. On his own volition, he bought the ERE book and read some of it, there are parts of the philosophy he accepts and some that he rejects. I enjoy talking to him about it because he has an openness to ideas (maybe outside of his Overton Window) that I don't often experience with others. Kind of like Jacob said upthread, there's a willingness for him to recognize he's incorrect, he also tracks with being way more brilliant than I with respect to parts of inter-objective reality. After all, he bought the book and will criticize it, though is also open to asking questions and working through things like, the ethics of investing, needs, wants and sacrifices, etc.

[7Wannabe5]

@Bicycle7:

Yeah, I think it might just be the case that others who have already grown up in or independently spun up their own alternative realities to "the cave", even if currently inclusive of appreciating some aspects of "the cave" such as dental insurance or the opportunity to flirt with diner waitresses on a regular basis are less likely to be easily approximated on the ERE Wheaton Scale of development.

Also, multi-generational ERE might be an interesting topic for another thread. I didn't read "ERE" until my kids were already young adults, but I read "YMOYL", "Tightwad Gazette" etc. when they were very young. So, for instance, although they may not always choose to be car-free, they both think that not owning a car is an acceptable option. In fact, one of the reasons why I currently own a car is that neither of my adult kids in their 30s nor my mother in her 80s owns a car and family get-togethers were becoming an impossible canoe puzzle.