Really enjoyed reading this. Super dense (probably too dense to really take in) but luckily it was a lot of either "yep, that's matches the pattern" or "oh, hadn't thought to frame it that way" for me; milage may vary. After all, if I think back to myself 7 years ago, I wouldn't have understood any of this or only understood it in the most superficial of ways!
I was reminded reading this, too, of why I went looking for a practice in a spiritual tradition (ultimately settling on Zen since it fit my aesthetic well). I had figured out a lot of this stuff but figuring it out is not the same as living it, and I wanted a practice space that allowed me to deeply engage with these concepts. I tried to piece it together as best I could on my own, but eventually realized I was ignoring the presence of multiple wisdom traditions with active practice communities that, although they often understood these concepts in weird ways, provided a way of doing what I had been looking for. What I've come to understand over the last year of Zen practice is that understanding is probably not even all that necessary: if you can create a process that works it doesn't matter if the people who built or maintain that process understand the underlying machinery that makes it work so long as they have robust ways of keeping it working as intended. A way of interpreting this might be to say that, through cultural evolution, the practice communities of some wisdom traditions have converged on things that work and we only in the last 50 years or so have come to really understand something of why they work in a way that makes sense to post-Enlightenment thought.
Thanks again for posting this and hope you post more of them!
Thanks!
I agree about not needing to understand the machinery in *most* cases. When the environment changes and you need a gears level model of which practices are still well adapted and which now have hidden downsides understanding the machinery becomes useful. Of course this gets super complicated when one of the things you are investigating is the tendency to need to understand things and the hidden downsides of *that*. :)
This post is a series of missives and notes I took while reading a popularization of cybernetics concepts as applied to self-help that was hugely influential in the self help field when first published in 1960. I am unsure if these notes will be of any interest to others. This is not a book review or a summary, but rather my own impressions of the models that the author was trying to build up and the cross connections between those concepts and others.
In general, I wish more people would make posts about books without feeling the need to do boring parts they are uninterested in (summarizing and reviewing) and more just discussing the ideas they found valuable. I think this would lower the friction for such posts, resulting in more of them. I often wind up finding such thoughts and comments about non-fiction works by LWers pretty valuable. I have more of these if people are interested.
Why this book: If you wish to understand the box you live in, investigate records from the time it was being built. The social psychology and cognitive science results that much of the lesswrong memeplex hangs its hat on are subject to an incentive structure whereby surprising results are the ones that are promoted or made more visible. But surprising relative to what? Is there some generic folk psychology template that I am comparing to? This plays some role, but I think I have underestimated the degree to which the defaults are constructs. I wanted to get a sense of how they might have been built, which lead to an investigation of Alfred Korzybski, the first person to utter "the map is not the territory", and the inception of cybernetics as a field of discipline, which also heavily influenced the people and work that later went on at Bell Labs and thus shaped the emergence of the information age.
I found this book interesting in particular because it did not use the standard anecdote-concept format of most self-help (with perhaps 2-8 concepts in an entire book) but instead seemed much more concept dense. I do recommend reading the whole thing if these notes seem interesting.
Preface
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
Chapter 11
Chapter 12
Chapter 13
Chapter 14
Chapter 15
Afterword