I think the #2 spot is well served by an active authenticity, one where an individual discovers the value of things, in this case community, because it serves their own wellbeing, not because the idea is enforced from outside, or "inflamed" by some prevailing idea. We forgotten how to track the contours of our own inner landscapes, to discover what truly benefits and serves us, and so are easily controlled by external forces, or buffeted by the dramatic pronouncements of others instead of being guided by our own internal, self-actualizing, compass.
I've been thinking along these lines when considering my reply to Sara in my next letter to her. But while I see that "drinking the Kool-Aid/inflamed by an idea" is different from "discovering the value of things because it serves their own wellbeing," it seems to suffer from the same scaling problem as the Kool-Aid drinking.
And if community is only good as long as it "serves their own wellbeing," it seems that they'll ditch is just as soon as it strikes them as more trouble than it's worth.
And so community remains a pleasant stopgap rather than a durable, robust force for public good.
Hi Andrew. Nice connecting. Not sure what you mean by the scaling problem, since the whole point of referencing authenticity is not to scale. To the extent that there is something inherently meaningful and useful in the idea of community, its value will be recognizable to many. So then scaling, if there is to be scaling, comes from many individuals individually tapping into a broadly recognized and durable good.
"And if community is only good as long as it "serves their own wellbeing," it seems that they'll ditch is just as soon as it strikes them as more trouble than it's worth." I am always ditching my health routine when it seems more trouble than it's worth. But am always called back to it because it is worth a great deal of that kind of trouble, and saves me from other kinds of trouble. We humans are always considering these trade-offs, what's worth my "trouble" in this moment? we ask ourselves. And as the moment changes, the equation changes and some things fall out. As they should. But if they are truly meaningful, and meaningful to me, then they will resurface. If they are not, they should fall by the wayside. Sounds to me like there's some basic ambivalence about the true value of community.
2) Most people will like parts of community but also find it a pain in the ass and so prefer to go their own way.
3) Most people won't really "try" community at this point in our society's evolution because we've both moved away from it cuturally/intellectually and also because some of our physical infrastructure is set up in a way that makes it harder than it was in earlier times.
4) Many people will complain about lack of community, particularly when in certain life phases (raising children, for instance) but most won't really disrupt their life for it.
So given this, and a lack of any sort of change that might alter the above, It seems to me that community will likely remain more "niche" than it was historically. In other words, the status quo will continue and perhaps will accelerate.
I agree there's value in community, and I do think it's much harder to participate in community structures of old because we don't really live those structures anymore, and maybe to try to do so is where "niche" comes in. People find new ways to assemble: online, in churches, sports, healing communities, communities that come together for a moment and then disperse, etc. If we broaden the lens, I think community is happening, and can happen in so many ways. Am I missing something?
No. I think we're saying a very similar thing. You're right that community will organically bubble up in these places and all sorts of unexpected ones. But you spoke about your health practices. I'm the same way. If I eat poorly or don't exercise I feel horrible, so I do both, though they're a pain.
But most people aren't like me. How many eat the recommended 7-10 servings of fruits and veggies a day? 10% per the CDC. I think 1/3rd get enough exercise.
So we see how it'll be. Most people will suffer from lack of community because it's too much work or not appealing enough. Some small part of the population will find it. The rest will suffer for the lack of it.
That's all I'm really saying. It's not going to scale. It will remain small, baring some rebalancing.
Seems like some common sense would go a long way. We’ve never been a collectivist or even remotely top down society, we were founded by Protestants. That said, we had a functioning society until we started rejecting things that scientifically we know to be beneficial to society and individuals at the expense of people’s well being for “individualism.” Two parent families are coming to mind. Normalized Rampant divorce is coming to mind. All a sacrifice of children. A decades long push for urbanism. There are endless examples.
I think the #2 spot is well served by an active authenticity, one where an individual discovers the value of things, in this case community, because it serves their own wellbeing, not because the idea is enforced from outside, or "inflamed" by some prevailing idea. We forgotten how to track the contours of our own inner landscapes, to discover what truly benefits and serves us, and so are easily controlled by external forces, or buffeted by the dramatic pronouncements of others instead of being guided by our own internal, self-actualizing, compass.
I've been thinking along these lines when considering my reply to Sara in my next letter to her. But while I see that "drinking the Kool-Aid/inflamed by an idea" is different from "discovering the value of things because it serves their own wellbeing," it seems to suffer from the same scaling problem as the Kool-Aid drinking.
And if community is only good as long as it "serves their own wellbeing," it seems that they'll ditch is just as soon as it strikes them as more trouble than it's worth.
And so community remains a pleasant stopgap rather than a durable, robust force for public good.
Or do you think I'm missing something?
Hi Andrew. Nice connecting. Not sure what you mean by the scaling problem, since the whole point of referencing authenticity is not to scale. To the extent that there is something inherently meaningful and useful in the idea of community, its value will be recognizable to many. So then scaling, if there is to be scaling, comes from many individuals individually tapping into a broadly recognized and durable good.
"And if community is only good as long as it "serves their own wellbeing," it seems that they'll ditch is just as soon as it strikes them as more trouble than it's worth." I am always ditching my health routine when it seems more trouble than it's worth. But am always called back to it because it is worth a great deal of that kind of trouble, and saves me from other kinds of trouble. We humans are always considering these trade-offs, what's worth my "trouble" in this moment? we ask ourselves. And as the moment changes, the equation changes and some things fall out. As they should. But if they are truly meaningful, and meaningful to me, then they will resurface. If they are not, they should fall by the wayside. Sounds to me like there's some basic ambivalence about the true value of community.
I consider it likely that:
1) There's value in community:
2) Most people will like parts of community but also find it a pain in the ass and so prefer to go their own way.
3) Most people won't really "try" community at this point in our society's evolution because we've both moved away from it cuturally/intellectually and also because some of our physical infrastructure is set up in a way that makes it harder than it was in earlier times.
4) Many people will complain about lack of community, particularly when in certain life phases (raising children, for instance) but most won't really disrupt their life for it.
So given this, and a lack of any sort of change that might alter the above, It seems to me that community will likely remain more "niche" than it was historically. In other words, the status quo will continue and perhaps will accelerate.
I agree there's value in community, and I do think it's much harder to participate in community structures of old because we don't really live those structures anymore, and maybe to try to do so is where "niche" comes in. People find new ways to assemble: online, in churches, sports, healing communities, communities that come together for a moment and then disperse, etc. If we broaden the lens, I think community is happening, and can happen in so many ways. Am I missing something?
No. I think we're saying a very similar thing. You're right that community will organically bubble up in these places and all sorts of unexpected ones. But you spoke about your health practices. I'm the same way. If I eat poorly or don't exercise I feel horrible, so I do both, though they're a pain.
But most people aren't like me. How many eat the recommended 7-10 servings of fruits and veggies a day? 10% per the CDC. I think 1/3rd get enough exercise.
So we see how it'll be. Most people will suffer from lack of community because it's too much work or not appealing enough. Some small part of the population will find it. The rest will suffer for the lack of it.
That's all I'm really saying. It's not going to scale. It will remain small, baring some rebalancing.
"Some small part of the population will find it. The rest will suffer for the lack of it."
Probably so. And it's in the face of these tragedies that we press on. Thanks so much for a great conversation Andrew, and in the middle of the day!
Seems like some common sense would go a long way. We’ve never been a collectivist or even remotely top down society, we were founded by Protestants. That said, we had a functioning society until we started rejecting things that scientifically we know to be beneficial to society and individuals at the expense of people’s well being for “individualism.” Two parent families are coming to mind. Normalized Rampant divorce is coming to mind. All a sacrifice of children. A decades long push for urbanism. There are endless examples.