31–40 of 75 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would add “Meditations on Moloch” from Slate Star Codex.
The Slate Star Codex that really spoke to me is "The Categories were made for man, not man for the categories" https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-ma...
> Forbidden > You don't have permission to access this resource.
- Internet Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20020309071211/https://www.jofre...>
- Archive.Today: https://archive.is/M3teQ>
> Forbidden > You don't have permission to access this resource.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The one that really changed how I think about the world was "A Muscular Empathy" by Ta-Nehisi Coates https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/a-muscu...
I appreciate the thought experiment of considering whether we would truly act differently in difficult circumstances, as most never engage in that level of self-reflection. However, this article seems to beg the question. Specifically, it starts by assuming that in the face of challenges like being born in poverty, the average person would not overcome them through will or effort alone. As a result, it cultivates emp…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
| flat organizations Flat and structureless are not necessarily synonymous. It's certainly possible to have a highly structured yet flat organization with clear roles and non-hierarchical decision-making.
Really? Because Adam Curtis spent something like 3 films and 10 hours to argue otherwise and not without a lot of examples. When there is no authority, predators become the authority.
Flat structures may, or may not, have a head.
What they don't have is deep hierarchy.
Mind that this has its own set of benefits and disadvantages. Fewer deparmental turf battles, but very broad spans of control and/or highly autonomous roles.
An ant or bee colony is a flat structure with a strong central control, at least reproductively: the queen. This isn't an ideal comparison, of course, as the individual workers don't take orders from the queen (or anyone else), but instead respond largely based on instinctual behaviours and pheremone signalling (in the case of ants at least, I'm not certain of bees).
Flat structures may lack any leadership, or have various rotating or ad hoc leaderships. These are more akin to the structureless organisations Freeman writes of.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Slate Star Codex that really spoke to me is "The Categories were made for man, not man for the categories" https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-ma...
Also "I Can Tolerate Anything Except The Outgroup": https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anythin...
There are relatively few things I've read that I can definitively point to as having almost instantly changed my mind on something. This is one of them. Reading often offers a broader understanding or different perspective, but seldom a sudden flash on insight. Others short reads that have changed my mind in that way include: - "The Inner Ring" by CS Lewis ( https://www.lewissociety.org/innerring/ ) - "On Photography…
It's something I think about often: what does it take to convince millions of people to walk into a graveyard? It just completely flies in the face of self preservation, kind of like the Aztec sacrifices
It's hard to think about this and not turn into a cynic
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I appreciate the thought experiment of considering whether we would truly act differently in difficult circumstances, as most never engage in that level of self-reflection. However, this article seems to beg the question. Specifically, it starts by assuming that in the face of challenges like being born in poverty, the average person would not overcome them through will or effort alone. As a result, it cultivates emp…
It is not circular reasoning. It is just something you do not agree with.