4.1.8 Spiritual

[guitarplayer]

4.1.x entries in the book are about an A5 page long. Here is a shout out to Jacob to publish the subsection as an addendum to the book

Think many people would be interested but appreciate maybe the ship has sailed.

[jacob]

It probably has, ha!

Looking back at age 48, when I wrote the ERE book at age 32-33, I was still more or less in an [albeit self-aware] egocentric/Kegan2 stage and so basically channeling INTJness hard. As such, I saw no use for any spiritual component to the point where I also didn't consider it important to anyone else. A few months before finishing the manuscript, I came across a blogpost from the permaculture-sphere that also talked about different forms of capitals. This caused (a yet another) moment of @#$@#$@, which happens often when following the Feynman approach of "working it out yourself instead of looking at what others have done". Luckily, they hadn't published yet, so I filed it under "independent discovery". It's interesting that the permaculture set DOES include a "spiritual capital" whereas they don't explicitly include a "technical capital" and so their author likely made this same "mistake" of projecting their Green-tinted values, just as I projected Orange-tinted values(*). Anyhoo, [permaculture] would be a good place to start for "spiritual capital". Chris Martenson also adopted the permaculture model for his book on resilience (Prosper), so also look into that.

(*) A community-oriented vMeme like SD:Green is more likely to see anything technical as a community-problem to be solved by other people. An individually vMeme like SD:Orange is more likely to have personal agency override any need for belief in higher beings.

These days, I think I'm much better equipped in terms of including different perspective. In terms of rewriting the book (or writing a second book) this has also proven to be somewhat of a course. I'm much more likely to get stuck in "but also consider this perspective"-lines of thought.

[guitarplayer]

I don’t know if it matters for the reader than much whether you were locked in the perspective at the time. I mean, in line with ‘include and transcend’ you can go back to that view to some extent and emulate it.

But fair enough that maybe it would not read very well so taking a few of these lower perspectives and getting a collage might be better, potentially at the cost of coherence.