May 29th, 2023
- old brain hemispheres notes from workflowy
- further on the comic etc #idea
- RH can point out to LH "the bridge is out ahead", and LH can then look up from the map and check this
- but LH will not by default notice anything else that's inaccurate about the map
- Max Harms said to me 2020-01-31 when I shared this idea
- ~"there's a mode of picking up the map not to use it but to update it"
- hemisphere books
- Liminal Thinking
- Unlocking Leadership Mindtraps
- others on my shelf
- mysticism, science & not-knowing twitter.com/TorriYatesOrr/status/1200850050412400640
- person stoked by intro of Ways of Attending
- Just left hemisphere things
- thread by Chapman on parallelness of brains and non-logic stuff
- maybe reply with my tweets about how the LH takes itself as primary
- tweet where I talk about cups & playing a LH/RH game twitter.com/Malcolm_Ocean/status/1148003045424414720
- "no ordinary apple" from Aro folks gmail.com/#all/FMfcgxwDsFWjfzvxDrfPfWqqVxMxxMJH
- person raving about M&E
- twitter thread about McGilchrist & surrendering to God
- tweet about truth as process
- remark in Fluidity Ark (re Kegan stages)
- Oooooh this dovetails really excitingly with recent thinking I've been doing. I've been learning more about Iain McGilchrist's new brain hemisphere model, and... (this might sound naive if viewed through the old pop psychology model, but bear with me)
The left hemisphere maintains a worldview that it thinks is consistent and perfect, always. That's its main job: to treat the world as something it understands and can manipulate. Modern Western culture WAY overemphasizes the left-hemisphere's way of thinking. This means that as people develop more sophisticated ways of making sense of the world, whether via rationality or new age stuff, they end up with some sort of system that they interpret everything through and are trying to follow to produce a right answer. If that system is external, you're K3; if its internal, K4. K5 represents transcending that stuckness by accessing the more open-ended right hemisphere perspective and allowing its validity.
The above is obviously a gross oversimplification, but there is a thing that feels important and true about it that is missing from the other ways I've thought about the Kegan model. Essentially, this implies that there's still a developmental thing in terms of mastering the left & right hemisphere's unique strengths and coordinating between them, but that the specific arc Kegan identified may be very much a pathology that is shared among all modern Western folk (and maybe a larger group, to a lesser extent) rather than the path of development you'd see in an already-fluid society where people are never taught to get so attached to their concept of right & wrong (which all lives in the LH).
- re senses and meaning is a sense
- from a friend:
- > oh i have a funny story i wanted to write up but didnt
so a husband tells his wife "fuck you, cry more"
sounds horrible, right?!?
but she laughs and they both laugh together about it for days
context:
she was crying for some unrelated thing that had
and she felt bad about it
and i ask her oh no what's up?
and she says "nothing, its silly, i dont wanna bother you"
fuck you, cry more!!! 😂
the amazing thing is in context when that phrase came to me i was smiling and laughing when i said it because it was so obviously proof-of-shared-intimacy in the moment
like only someone you've loved for a long time could say that to you with confidence and good cheer
- convo w Brian Toomey
- your NNTD stuff is stereopsis for resolving distrust
- a calibration dance
- Romeo is unsnarling spaghetti code
- a kind of recursive tracing back
- my core thing is confession: just naming every control system that's trying to name this parameter
- Jake Orthwein
- paper on Aumann agreement by Tyler Cowen
- > We review literatures on agreeing to disagree and on the rationality of differing priors, in
order to evaluate the honesty of typical disagreements. A robust result is that honest
truth-seeking agents with common priors should not knowingly disagree. Typical
disagreement seems explainable by a combination of random belief influences and by
priors that tell each person that he reasons better than others. When criticizing others,
however, people seem to uphold rationality standards that disapprove of such selffavoring priors. This suggests that typical disagreements are dishonest. We conclude by
briefly considering how one might try to become more honest when disagreeing