Links to Consider, 4/15
Robin Hanson on monoculture; Marilyn Simon on male-female relationships; Greg Lukianoff on Martin Gurri; Vaishnav Sunil on the curse of conscientiousness
The small peasant cultures of yesterday were poor, reluctant to change, and subject to frequent epidemics, famines, and invasions. They faced strong selection pressures—one false move could kill them. In contrast, today’s handful of huge, rich, fast-changing cultures face weak selection pressures and can survive many false moves. Paradoxically, that’s just why you should maybe distrust them.
He argues that in the context of evolution, large entities have inherent advantages, but they have the disadvantage that they tend to degrade over time. They lose their competitive edge. If small entities are unable to compete, you get overall stagnation. He uses examples of the business world and the world of biological species.
The clearest proof of biologically maladaptive culture drift is fertility. Children per woman per lifetime has been declining worldwide for centuries, and is now below replacement levels almost everywhere.
He is pessimistic that this cultural trend can be reversed.
In these posts we will look at different aspects of submission, its relation to duty, to surrender, and to freedom. Ultimately this thought experiment aims toward joy. It is my contention that submission opens us up to more of ourselves. Further, it is my contention the female submission allows women to experience their bodies as a joy for others, an act of self-giving which I have found to be the most delicious, the most joyous, and the sexiest thing I have ever known. The goodness of life is not to be found in the unfettered exercise of will, but in joy; not in diligent surveillance and control of one’s body, but in a blissful lack of self-consciousnesses about it; not in guarding self-respect against humiliations, but in a wellspring of confidence in one’s unshakable dignity.
Recommended by Matthew B. Crawford. Simon reminds him of Joni Mitchell’s album Blue, which is also one of my favorites.
I doubt that I will feel comfortable with Simon’s approach to male-female relationships—or with Joni Mitchell’s, for that matter. But I do appreciate that they want to play with male-female differences rather than endorse a mission to erase them.
If I could be an older teenager or young adult in any era, I think I would pick the early 1960s (in reality, I was in elementary school then). Sex was still something mysterious, not mechanical and not something to be jumped into. The games of flirtation and romance at that time strike me as fun and challenging. Movie romances (my memories are of The Music Man and A Thousand Clowns) are something you could take a kid to even as you enjoy watching an adult man and woman navigate their relationship.
One thing must be said about the “crisis of authority” we find ourselves in due to the overwhelming power of negation: Very often, what critics have discovered is that our existing “knowledge” was based on some pretty thin evidence, bad assumptions, and sometimes not much more than the pieties of some elites. Understanding the crisis of authority as only being wrongfully destructive of expertise is to miss the fact that, frankly, we are often asking far too much of expertise and experts — and oversight itself has not been all that rigorous.
He writes in praise of Martin Gurri’s The Revolt of the Public.
I'm bullish on the idea of young graduates adopting a self-enforced policy of "Quit in 12 months unless this job is a great fit." This changes defaults and guards against status quo bias. You can be confident that you're not quitting "only because it was hard." If you decide to stay, you owe yourself an explanation; if you quit, you don't.
I am high in conscientiousness, which means I did the opposite. Following Sunil’s advice would have changed my life. For the better or for the worse is hard to say.
I would have quit graduate school during the first year, because I hated it, instead of sticking it out to get my Ph.D. Would I have ended up in law school? Or doing computer programming?
I would have quit the Fed much sooner than I did. Would I have gone to Wall Street? A bank?
Honestly, none of these alternative life paths sounds so appealing.
substacks referenced above:
@
@
@
@
Would it be fair to call this "don't be conscientious" a "luxury belief"? (an idea that is popular in these parts)
Fast quitting and stick-to-itiveness are both beneficial. It makes all the difference in the world in discerning which one to apply when. But like Arnold, I cannot even say with 20-20 hindsight which choices were the best ones and which ones I wish I did differently.
I chose to study Mechanical Engineering. In hindsight I should have studied Civil Engineering. For no other reason than the quality of the Civil Engineering program was superior at my school. I ended up taking many courses from the Civil Engineering department and the job I took in the Civil Engineering school paved the way to what became my career in computer programming. But for odd reasons I was stubborn I to earn a degree in Mechanical Engineering and I never switched. I have never used my college degree and probably would not have used a Civil Engineering degree either. But if I had been less stubborn I could have made better use of my college efforts.
Now an example of fast quitting. At one point in learning computers I was fascinated by computer graphics. And this fascination was the reason I decided to get into programming. In short time I realized I did not have a mind to do anything other than the most basic computer graphics. My talents were better suited for other programming challenges. I probably spent less than 100 hours not learning computer graphics algorithms. I am proud of myself for realizing so quickly that niche wasn't going to work for me.
My life experience is if you are persistent in working towards what you like to do, you will find it. This means you need to put yourself in the arena of work and then be flexible to adjust the work you do to fit the tasks that yield the most fulfillment. This is where fast-quitting can become an obstacle. If you quit too early you may miss out on the opportunity that was developing right in front of you.
A final thought. The most important consideration for enjoying work is to work with enjoyable people. I don't recommend quitting on the first on-the-job conflict. But a reason to quit sooner than later is if the people involved in the work make you miserable.