Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
henrikkarlsson.xyz
Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
1–10 of 115 posts
Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
#2These were the crucial bits for me:
> "Sundays are for listing everything that went wrong during the week on the blackboard we painted on the wall of my study, so we can figure out what needs to change."
and
> "I liked to think about our life as a piece of software. We had our routines and our principles, this was the code. We ran the code by living it. The list on the blackboard was the bug log, a record of the ways our routines broke down in contact with reality. We kept going through the code until our life did what we wanted it to do, more or less."
Love the idea of bug log/dev cycle as a metaphor to use for improving relationships.
Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
#3I like the co-evolution framing but the listing of faults on the whiteboard reminded me of https://xkcd.com/523/
Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
#4Beautiful.
Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
#5This is so important and underrated in life.
> "This is what I infer when I see someone who is comfortable in their unique strangeness, too. There probably exists someone who enabled that evolution of personality. A parent, a friend group, a spouse. It is rare for people to come into themselves if no one is excited and curious about their core, their potential. We need someone who gives us space to unfold."
Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
#6I like the co-evolution framing but the listing of faults on the whiteboard reminded me of https://xkcd.com/523/
I think if you have enough problems to list them on a weekly basis, your relationship is probably in trouble
I feel like healthy relationships don't have a rate of a problem or more per week
Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
#7I like the co-evolution framing but the listing of faults on the whiteboard reminded me of https://xkcd.com/523/
I think if you have enough problems to list them on a weekly basis, your relationship is probably in trouble I feel like healthy relationships don't have a rate of a problem or more per week
I like how the xkcd seems to frame it: seeking out problems to list can cause insignificant problems to seem significant. It's how "writer's mind" can be a problem in deepening a meditation practice.
Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
#8I like the co-evolution framing but the listing of faults on the whiteboard reminded me of https://xkcd.com/523/
I think if you have enough problems to list them on a weekly basis, your relationship is probably in trouble I feel like healthy relationships don't have a rate of a problem or more per week
> I feel like healthy relationships don't have a rate of a problem or more per week
Problems are much quicker and easier to resolve when they’re fresh and small than after you let them simmer into deep resentment.
“Hey when you left that empty can on the coffee table on Friday, it made me feel like you don’t care about our shared space”
vs
“You always leave shit everywhere and I’m sick and tired of looking at your mess”
Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
#9I like the co-evolution framing but the listing of faults on the whiteboard reminded me of https://xkcd.com/523/
I think if you have enough problems to list them on a weekly basis, your relationship is probably in trouble I feel like healthy relationships don't have a rate of a problem or more per week
Exactly. I started writing a list to give to my partner and as soon as the pen hit the paper I went "Shit. If I have to do this, it's already over."
Relationships do require some amount of work. But if you have to make a white board and "write a program" like someone above referenced, that ain't it. We all have different tolerances but if you're writing software to keep your relationship together, you need to reflect on why it's necessary in the first place.
Re: Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
#10This is so important and underrated in life. > "This is what I infer when I see someone who is comfortable in their unique strangeness, too. There probably exists someone who enabled that evolution of personality. A parent, a friend group, a spouse. It is rare for people to come into themselves if no one is excited and curious about their core, their potential. We need someone who gives us space to unfold."
[EDIT: might be relevant to AI safety
https://eschwitz.substack.com/p/strange-intelligence-strange...
> It might even, sometimes, strike us as remarkably, foolishly wrong. ]
DOUBLE THIS! From time to time, some person I've just met would either assume I have no friends, OR wildly popular. Although both untrue, I never try to correct them, though it does kinda tickle me in a weird way.
The truth is what you just said above (though it's more like a quasicommunity than a friend group -- the difference, I surmise, being that a quasicommunity still has potential for coevolution).
I'm also guessing that if you integrate the opinions of strangers, it converges towards a correct label of strangeness.