Elo comments on Open thread, June 27 - July 3, 2016 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (79)
Why do you focus on the suggestions that are also made elsewhere instead of what's unique in the King, Warrior, Magician, Lover framework?
The model is meaningless beyond what it suggests you do. If I were to spend a long time understanding the whole damn model I could possibly end up generating my own predictive set of ideas from that model. Because I have not spent that time - it's easier for me to just look at the (already generated) outputs of the model and comment on the results. I am not 100% sure that all those suggestions fit within the model itself but generally if the site ends in those kinds of suggestions, as above:
No, if you ignore the model you ignore the reason of why people recommend King, Warrior, Magician, Lover. I don't think anybody who recommended that book to me did so, because of a shallow list of recommendations that fits into a few bullet points.
This is similar how taking a list of bulletpoints about CFAR knowledge doesn't compare to evaluating the value that a CFAR workshop provides to it's attendies.
There's no value in forming a judgement of a model that one doesn't understand like this by a shallow look at it.
There plenty of shallow personal development literature out there that people who like to consume listicles but I haven't heared any recommendations for this book from that audience but mostly from people who think deeper and engage deeply with it.
I will be delighted to hear your review when you get around to writing it up.
My current state is that I haven't read the full book or used the ideas in my life but I know multiple people who do, who value the ideas highly and who are generally good sources of personal development ideas.