The Foundation

[jacob]

Isaac Asimov's Foundation series is more collapse&decline-oriented than apocalyptic and so takes a longer view than the usual "drama".

What's interesting here is the concept of "psychohistory" in which change can be predicted and influenced at a societal scale. Using this theory (which is forgotten during the early part of the collapse) to "almost surely" cause and generate certain events (called Seldon Crises), the future is steered through the collapse [of the galactic empire]. Psychohistory is basically a mathematical refinement of informed intuition (vision-logic) that allows for precise calculation of probabilities.

This is relevant to ERE2. While we don't have psycho-history, we do have informed intuition.

People seem to be working on three aspects [of collapse]. First, there are the metacrisis people most of whom have a very theoretical (and often prescriptive) top-down (=if everybody did it) approach that is disconnected from the practical and rarely bothers with the "here2there"-problem. They talk a lot but they don't do much. Second, there are the ideologists who use any one of these theory to implement something practical. This often takes a form that is barely recognizable by the original theory and often mostly uses the words of the theory to implement some kind of personal mission (also see the Stoa2 discussion on "failure-mode"). They practice, but their thinking is muddy. Third, and where I see ERE2, is a bottom-up approach has little competition. Here the point is simply to find (done) and create (done on an individual scale (ERE1), but not at the group scale (ERE2) ) the praxis with the highest odds of getting through under the presumption that the problem is better solved algorithmically (good praxis) than analytically (finding the solution).

In some sense, the point of ERE2 is to create a kind of Foundation.

[7Wannabe5]

Interesting. Many decades since I read the series. Will have to pick up some new copies before I comment further.

Also, it might be helpful if you offered some examples of the more theoretical and idealistic approaches. For instance, I think my permaculture projects have been a rough, muddy-muddled mix of idealistic and bottom-up practice, but maybe I’m not on the same page.

[J_]

under the presumption that the problem is better solved algorithmically (good praxis) than analytically (finding the solution).

In some sense, the point of ERE2 is to create a kind of Foundation for this planet.

A kind of nutritionfacts.org but then expanded to the wide established praxis of ERE?

[daylen]

Third, and where I see ERE2, is a bottom-up approach has little competition. Here the point is simply to find (done) and create (done on an individual scale (ERE1), but not at the group scale (ERE2) ) the praxis with the highest odds of getting through under the presumption that the problem is better solved algorithmically (good praxis) than analytically (finding the solution).

In some sense, the point of ERE2 is to create a kind of Foundation.

I'll have to try giving it a read. Although I do not have the greatest track record of finishing fiction books.

It's possible that the praxis with the highest odds of survival into all futures is the anti-algorithmic approach that is unpredictable and continuously bouncing around in the space of solutions while still managing to be satisfied in the here and now. Perhaps not, but it would seem that a steady algorithm would be predictable and so may attract saturation and potentially competition. In some sense the praxis with the highest odds of getting through some kind of filter is the one with the fewest expectations. Pretty unlikely that precisely your praxis or algorithm will be preserved into the future, but the likelihood that the general praxis of humanity as a whole will be preserved into the future may be pretty good. No matter how improbable your praxis is to survive the near future it will likely reincarnate into some form or another eventually. See Loki series for a fairly extreme take on this.

[7Wannabe5]

@daylen:

The anti-fragile?

[daylen]

Right, an algorithmic approach may at best be robust? Perhaps we are just getting into weeds here with what is meant by an algorithm. As any finite entity could in theory be represented by a particular algorithm from an external point of view. Though, from an internal point of view the entity may not be able to predict what they will do and thus identify as "anti-algorithmic". Also relates to being a system open to change based on environmental or global state. If you can sufficiently predict your own praxis no matter the external state then perhaps you need not adapt and can pass on a self-evidencing algo with high fidelity.

[7Wannabe5]

@daylen:

An algorithmic long-term strategic approach, such as ERE, can also be resilient. For simplistic example, you could just DIVERSIFY whenever STOCK exceeds level X. A resilient strategy is more likely to lead to survival at time t, but an anti-fragile strategy is one that actually thrives in a chaotic or crisis laden environement. So, if a primarily robust, a primarily resilient, and a primarily anti-fragile strategy are competing for dominance/survival through chaotic event-scape, it might be difficult to predict a winner. However, I think an anti-fragile strategy can also be algorithmic.

Goal: Still Getting Laid in 2060.

Robust: Make a good choice for marriage. Continue to invest in your marriage.
Resilient: Develop relationship skills. Invest and trade in multiple relationships.
Anti-Fragile: Stay sexy. Hustle and roll with the hand just dealt.

The mixed algorithm that Taleb recommends is 80% Robust and 20% Anti-Fragile rather than 100% Resilient within defined scope. IOW, investing in a diversified stock fund is kind of like enacting the Resilient strategy, but only with partners who all live in the same flood plain, or with no trading strategy. Or something like that.

Of course, there are ultimately no independent options within the meta-crisis. For example, as I mentioned elsewhere, when I imagined worst-case scenarios for my theoretical grandchildren in the longer-term future, I neglected to imagine or calculate the extent to which the worsening meta-crisis would influence the likelihood of them never being born in the shorter-term future.

[daylen]

Seems like going into resilient and anti-fragile involves moving away from the concrete into more abstraction and thus less grounding in replicable "algorithms". Like for instance, it is easy to say that building relationships is resilient but coming up with an algorithm that can be copied by others reliably? Perhaps not so much without adapting the algorithm to them personally (i.e. an evolutionary algorithm). Even more so with "stay sexy".

[jacob]

@daylen - An algorithmic (closed loop control system) is resilient to changing conditions in the sense that [the algorithm] only needs to know HOW to act locally in time and space. It does not need to know the global situation. For example, there is an algorithm that will get an agent out of a labyrinth without having to know the entire labyrinth (all possible future worlds).

Given that all possible future worlds can't be known, it is impossible to analyze the future and find a solution that says "do exactly this". However, this is where many of those in the first class of the OP above go globally and many of those in the second class of the OP go globally.

In particular, should the situation change randomly or the agent be dropped off at a random place, it will be able to act well by making the right choices. The only danger is getting stuck in local minima or maxima but adding a small random component will make it possible to get out of those. (For the nerds: a simulated annealing algorithm for a sample of "walkers" works somewhat like that.) This is a minor problem though. Randomness comes at a cost that must be paid elsewhere.

Random action is also a kind of algorithmic behavior. It's usually a pretty bad one though. Agents can do better than that.

Genetics and evolution is a good metaphor. Compare the easy but error prone replication of RNA vs DNA. RNA only beats DNA through speed and numbers. DNA by virtue of being slower and more expensive beats RNA through complexity (and not paying for errors).

It's my posit that the renaissance man is the most adaptable and effective strategy for the uncertainty that is the 21st century and that the WOG design makes the effectiveness efficient! I think we have proof of concept for individuals for ERE1 when interacting with NPCs. The question is what happens when ERE1 meets another ERE1 or similar PC. This creates new systems of interactions and that is what ERE2 is: multiplayer.

Results of ERE1+ERE1 (=ERE2) so far are this forum (in particular the journal interactions), MMGs, and regular physical meetups.

These creations require three things:

1. Critical mass, that is, enough ERE1s
2. A medium for making the connections. E.g. forum software, skype, a campground. (Basically a value and a means of transacting it. I've talked about this before.)
3. Someone to spark and drive the connection, that is, a community organizer.

Ideally this is self-generating in the sense that it does not rely on one or a few individuals. The proof of whether an idea works is whether it survives the death or retirement of its founder. I'll note that it's almost impossible to predict what will happen in ERE2 given the difficulty of all three things occurring in the mind of the same person. As such, my algorithm is to throw mud on the wall to try things out. This is not done blindly or randomly. The goal is to increase the probabilities for the three points to increase the chances of things coming together. Basically working towards a zeitgeist where things will emerge automagically. Preparing the environment has more traction than trying to come up with a brilliant plan or hoping someone else will.

[7Wannabe5]

@daylen:

I tend to agree. I would say that you need more symbols in order to move from a Robust strategy to a Resilient strategy, as opposed to just an even more Robust strategy. And the anti-fragile is almost by definition your unique edge, maybe the moment in which you are inventing or integrating new symbols on the fly?

@jacob:

And sexual reproduction can be proven to be even more effective than asexual reproduction.

[daylen]

Perhaps efficiency is what anti-algorithmic thinking is attempting to avoid? That is, anti-algorithmic would also imply anti-randomness since randomness can be effectively simulated. Any evolutionary algorithm of determining best "fit" would also be discounted. Otherwise you are in some sense the product of what you believe the evolution function of the universe to be (i.e. your intuited solution) as opposed to an ongoing participant in the unfolding of universal determination?

[daylen]

As such, my algorithm is to throw mud on the wall to try things out. This is not done blindly or randomly. The goal is to increase the probabilities for the three points to increase the chances of things coming together. Basically working towards a zeitgeist where things will emerge automagically. Preparing the environment has more traction than trying to come up with a brilliant plan or hoping someone else will.

I think we are closer to being on the same page than it may appear. Throwing mud on the wall to see how some external conditions play out is in some sense what I am describing as "anti-algorithmic". It doesn't presume any one effective "fit" or "solution" to the environment. Every prior algorithm influences the next.

Preparing the self + environment involves adapting to some set of unpredictable conditions or futures. Coming up with a brilliant plan would be algorithmic thinking and at best robust to contingencies. Hoping for the best is essentially random.

[clark]

ERE2 will be easy if Jacob can become The Mule.

[clark]

It's interesting that the Foundation series is based on the collapse of the Roman Empire. Nietszche describes a massive moral transformation during this time when Christianity gradually replaced Classical belief systems. For instance, to the early Romans, "virtue" meant manliness or martial vigour, whereas in Christian times "virtue" meant things like chastity or charity. Yet this process of moral transformation took 300 years.

So I've always thought of ERE2 as something like a moral transformation that would take hundreds of years to show fruit and that wouldn't show itself until deep into the crisis of our era. Perhaps in a few hundred years, "virtue" will mean the ability to live off as little as possible.

[delay]

For instance, to the early Romans, "virtue" meant manliness or martial vigour, whereas in Christian times "virtue" meant things like chastity or charity. Yet this process of moral transformation took 300 years.

That's a surprising portrayal of Roman and Christian virtues. Cicero wrote in De Officiis in 44 BC about four grounds of moral righteousness:
1. The perception and intelligent development of truth
2. The preservation of civil society, with the faithful rendering to everyone what he is properly owed
3. The greatness and power of a noble and unconquerable spirit
4. In the order and moderation of things which consist of temperance and self-control

Four hundred years later, Saint August more or less accepts Cicero's definition. Saint August modifies this by saying it has to be motivated by love of God and that the rewards come in the afterlife.

What if virtues like martial vigour, chastity and charity are responses to the environment? For example when you go to war praising manliness and martial vigour seems like a good idea. Chastity helps groups of the same gender live together, like monks and nuns. Public charity softens the anger of the poor.

[clark]

"VIRTUS, for the Roman, does not carry the same overtones as the Christian 'virtue'. But like the Greek andreia, VIRTUS has a primary meaning of 'acting like a man' (vir) [cf. the Renaissance virtù ), and for the Romans this meant first and foremost 'acting like a brave man in military matters'. virtus was to be found in the context of 'outstanding deeds' (egregia facinora), and brave deeds were the accomplishments which brought GLORIA ('a reputation')." https://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/fides.html. The two concepts of virtue are significantly different.

But I was merely making the point that gradual but wholesale changes in a population's moral outlook can occur in times of crisis. The Roman Empire is a poignant example because Christianity was waiting in the wings to fill the void. Yet even then it took hundreds of years for this new belief system to percolate from the general populace to the leadership. People hoping to do ERE2 need to have the understanding that it may take centuries for it to succeed, and that's assuming that there is a major, long-term crisis. The Foundation series makes this point in by having the Foundation established in a faraway galaxy so that it can gradually develop itself for centuries before the Imperial Crisis hits so that it can be ready to fill the void. But while the Foundation series discusses filling an economic and political void, I am discussing the possible filling of a moral and material void.

Sorry if I dragged the discussion off-topic. I do believe that there is a religio-spiritual-moral component of understanding the prospects of ERE2 that is sorely lacking in these discussions, but I also know why it's best to avoid these topics, as they tend to create the same level of flame wars as political topics.

[chenda]

The human response to the spiraling environmental crisis of the sixth and seventh centuries activated the full apocalyptic potential of the surrounding religious atmosphere. Christianity is an eschatological faith. Apocalyptic notes run like a constant background music across the history of the church. But they have not always had the same intensity. After the fervor of the first Christian generations, expectations of imminent judgement were subdued...Then nature intervened. The natural catastrophes of the sixth century induced one of the greatest mood swings in human history...Signs of profound collective distress have been detected in places so far removed as Norse myth and Chinese Buddhism

The Fate of Rome, Kyle Harper p 277

Critical study of Islam, peeling back the layers of subsequent centuries, have emphasised that monotheism and eschatological warning were central to the prophet Muhammad's religious message...The origins of Islam lie in an urgent eschatological movement, willing to spread its revelation by the sword, proclaiming the Hour to be at hand. Here, the eschatological energy of the seventh century found its most unrestrained development.

Ibid pp 284-285

[J_]

Foundation > Ere 2 > movement for many....

The ere book, the blog, this forum, mmgroups, ere-gatherings are the start and the prove.They all inspired me.

Internalization of the renaissance person widens your knowledge and, by practicing, your skills

To live well you need further knowledge, you need springs or wells which bubbles in such a way that it suits you,
that you understand those knowledge

And then, as @jennypenny wrote, there comes a moment that you must leave the classroom. She means the theoretical
and abstract ways of thinking which many of the active forum members write on and on.

So to be a real Foundation you must choose for yourself which (ere) way of living is suitable for you, for your abilities,
for your character. Then you can become an inspirational person for others. And perhaps they feel, that in some way they
want evolve their life in such a direction.

[daylen]

It seems pretty practical to develop an active imagination that allows you to explore endless possible realities whenever or wherever you like. Practically it is trivial to survive in the modern world although this can be made more challenging by foregoing modern necessities to better adapt yourself to a wider range of realities.

Though, if you learn to enjoy living in your own mind much of the time.. you just might not care to actually do much in the real world since it will all be a drop in the bucket at the end of your life. That one life goes quick. Anything that can be done in the real world can also be done in your imagination.. and so so so much more.

Though, it's always possible to veer off into woo. This can be moderated through gathering evidence of the current state of reality and turning active imagination into active inference.

I mean if you can cook, clean, fix things, build things, find things, and develop relationships around you then that captures the renaissance ideal in an ice cream sunday. The rest is toppings and exploring the imaginal realm is the cherry on top for many.

[7Wannabe5]

I mean if you can cook, clean, fix things, build things, and develop relationships around you then that captures the renaissance ideal in an ice cream sunday. The rest is toppings and exploring the imaginal realm is the cherry on top for many.

Well said. My response to this confusing, rather insulting, and IMO false dichotomy was going to be something more along the lines of experiencing no shortage of old-guys-shooting-the-concrete-shit-round-the-table-in-the-diner-next-door-to-the-hardware-store-or-the-gym in my real life. "Hey Hank, did the 573xw work for you?", "Uh, no, Bob, I had to go up to the 5036xr for that one." , "No shit, the 5036-er. That must have set you back a dollar or two.", "Well, Bob, I was kinda hoping you were going to cover the coffee."

Since I do often write in an abstract manner here, and I have been confused by comments made on this forum, yesterday I asked an extremely forthright (most likely to tell me that the pants do make my ass look fat) real world friend whose primary occupation is managing the construction of large projects for the Army Corp of Engineers whether I am a human who is more likely to be/stay theoretical or do things in the real world, and he immediately replied "Do things in the real world." So, it may simply be a matter of limited perspective or differing values.

So to be a real Foundation you must choose for yourself which (ere) way of living is suitable for you, for your abilities,
for your character. Then you can become an inspirational person for others. And perhaps they feel, that in some way they
want evolve their life in such a direction.

So, for instance, writing in an abstract manner on this forum would negate the fact that a human might also be currently spending 20/hrs week tutoring disadvantaged kids who were left behind in a region that first experienced a major ecological/technological water disaster 10 years ago, and then lost additional opportunities during the first pandemic of the 21st century? I suppose stories about affluent old guys exercising in beautiful locations, inclusive of super interesting health metrics, is more inspirational to the majority of humans towards resolution of the metacrisis? Yodel-Ay-Hee-Ho, is that an echo I hear?