Not to be hypocritical but rather just to respond to your opening question, to use the Roman categories, I think the most undersupplied are Comitas and Clementia. I think that, especially in online discourse, there is far too little good humor, mercy, willingness to work towards common ground and forgive missteps.
This lack is certainly exacerbated by the nature of social media; in real life we value people who are friendly and easygoing, who support us and are easy to work with; in online discussions there is no way to "like" a "like", no way to incentivize agreeableness. The incentive is always to critique, to find offense, to point out a weakness, to comment an "umm akchually". Each such response can be liked and quoted and retweeted. But an "I agree, this is really well said" will not be.
I'm with German ex-Chancellor Helmut Schmidt on this: Anyone who has visions should go see a doctor. Tony Blair and George Bush had visions - look where that got us. Methodically and incrementally making a country's inhabitants' lives better. Isn't that what we want our politicians to do? If that's a vision, then it's one I can adhere to.
Ah, the vision thing. The reason there is not a Model Earth department in every university becomes quite clear when you run the numbers. What does everyone want? Equitable prosperity on a healthy planet. We are ruining the earth when the richest 1% of the world's population only earns $40,000 annually. If you ask any AI persistently what would the population be to restore the earth to a pre-industrial environment in five generations, you will get the answer of 350-500 million people. The only rational vision for our planet requires a reduction and reorganization of the earth's population to fit the already existing wealth. That is the obvious but forbidden truth that aborts any articulation of the vision you muse about. Would it be useful for this "vision" to enter the public discussion? Well, it would help to put a stop to all of the silly pretensions of our existing models, including the "underpopulation" problem (which is really a demographic complaint on the way to further ruin of the health of the earth) and socialism, which resolves the inequity issue but accelerates the degradation of the earth's health by multiplying the number of prosperous people without reducing the total population (see the spread of prosperity in China).
"Nineteen out of every twenty shall die, with no descendants to mourn them" seems like the sort of vision that, traditionally, is associated with particularly extreme villainy, which heroes go on grand quests to thwart.
I agree, although I'd say vision is always undersupplied. People have always had a hard time stepping back and seeing how the world could be better in an actionable way, as opposed to utopias. It's like the "what's water" fish.
This is also a common transition when people hit midlife. The aperture widens, especially if you've succeeded in covering your basic needs and ambitions, and you start to wonder what you can do to make the world better. I think every generation goes through this.
Nan, I follow your work on CDR and appreciate the line of inquiry here. I have been walking down the philosophy road as well… a few thoughts.
* Socrates offers the cardinal virtues (temperance, courage, wisdom, and justice) in The Republic [Plato]. Justice is a bit murky, up for debate, and the topic of a large portion of the book. My interpretation is something like “the ability to feel anger and its causes,” especially in an altruistic way.
* The Prince [Machiavelli] notes the best leaders are the ones who possess virtù – something like ‘the will to power, and suggests it is perhaps preferable to exist with moral nihilism to be the best leader.
* Another interesting track is to consider how humans differ from animals. On Human nature [EO Wilson] notes four ways (altruism, religion, aggression, and sexuality) – these are not virtues per se, but a way homo sapiens map onto the world, and somewhat related.
I wonder if virtue could be thought of as 'moral force' - lifeforce that helps us shepherd 'the good' into existence, or resist something 'bad', from becoming real. Machiavelli might disagree with the good/bad dichotomy and simplify to 'the power to do'. This would put vision and virtue on different tracks, though.
interesting question nan and great exploration on vision - in some ways I wholeheartedly agree, and in some ways I’m not too sure; I know for a fact that there are undersupplied things in my life (like decisiveness towards my values, of which I am, well, undecided) but as for a virtue that is undersupplied, in general/humanity, today? that’s a steep question and to that I answer, I don’t think there is one.
virtues that are lacking within me and perhaps the people around me are on the contrary in opposite parts of the world. an easy one is self-ambition in my world, I grow up and continue to be in an atmosphere that encourages compliance, the way things should be, respect for elders and filial piety in a way that stifles personal growth; but in another culture, this self-momentum is like an avalanche, with belief and confidence and risk-taking that comes in spades, such that they sometimes forego collectivism, vision for the greater good, and their respect for elders is nothing more than saying hello to their parents once every six months.
another example that comes to mind is environmentalism. I am of the understand that we’re more environmentally conscious than ever before, but I know for a fact that given the choice between the $2 plastic bag or the $2.50 biodegradable plastic, I’d take the first (that is - if I’m not already bringing the $2 plastic bag I purchased six weeks ago with me)
I’ll have to mull over this one - maybe there’s an answer / maybe there isn’t, but thanks for sharing nam :))
on second thought, I just walked into a train after typing this comment and already have an answer - the ability to be bored. there’s about thirty of us here and every single one of us whipped out our phones upon sitting down. that was quick.
I like this a lot Nan. I think something else that is undersupplied is then the forum for exploring the particular virtue in a centralised place. I'm not sure where to start if I wanted to explore competing different visions for the City I live in.
60-70% of the people want universal healthcare. VISION: This video shows exactly how to do it. Put the market on the SUPPLY side, & and put a single-payer on the DEMAND side. The first political party that learns how to talk both social AND market principles will enjoy a long political ascendancy. Full exploration of all principles is given in the full playlist, called "New Addition to Economics."
The nameless virtue of minding one's own business.
Not to be hypocritical but rather just to respond to your opening question, to use the Roman categories, I think the most undersupplied are Comitas and Clementia. I think that, especially in online discourse, there is far too little good humor, mercy, willingness to work towards common ground and forgive missteps.
This lack is certainly exacerbated by the nature of social media; in real life we value people who are friendly and easygoing, who support us and are easy to work with; in online discussions there is no way to "like" a "like", no way to incentivize agreeableness. The incentive is always to critique, to find offense, to point out a weakness, to comment an "umm akchually". Each such response can be liked and quoted and retweeted. But an "I agree, this is really well said" will not be.
I love this! I've linked it in a new post about how to develop positive visions: https://meaningness.substack.com/p/seeing-like-a-good-king
I'm with German ex-Chancellor Helmut Schmidt on this: Anyone who has visions should go see a doctor. Tony Blair and George Bush had visions - look where that got us. Methodically and incrementally making a country's inhabitants' lives better. Isn't that what we want our politicians to do? If that's a vision, then it's one I can adhere to.
Ah, the vision thing. The reason there is not a Model Earth department in every university becomes quite clear when you run the numbers. What does everyone want? Equitable prosperity on a healthy planet. We are ruining the earth when the richest 1% of the world's population only earns $40,000 annually. If you ask any AI persistently what would the population be to restore the earth to a pre-industrial environment in five generations, you will get the answer of 350-500 million people. The only rational vision for our planet requires a reduction and reorganization of the earth's population to fit the already existing wealth. That is the obvious but forbidden truth that aborts any articulation of the vision you muse about. Would it be useful for this "vision" to enter the public discussion? Well, it would help to put a stop to all of the silly pretensions of our existing models, including the "underpopulation" problem (which is really a demographic complaint on the way to further ruin of the health of the earth) and socialism, which resolves the inequity issue but accelerates the degradation of the earth's health by multiplying the number of prosperous people without reducing the total population (see the spread of prosperity in China).
"Nineteen out of every twenty shall die, with no descendants to mourn them" seems like the sort of vision that, traditionally, is associated with particularly extreme villainy, which heroes go on grand quests to thwart.
I agree, although I'd say vision is always undersupplied. People have always had a hard time stepping back and seeing how the world could be better in an actionable way, as opposed to utopias. It's like the "what's water" fish.
This is also a common transition when people hit midlife. The aperture widens, especially if you've succeeded in covering your basic needs and ambitions, and you start to wonder what you can do to make the world better. I think every generation goes through this.
Nan, I follow your work on CDR and appreciate the line of inquiry here. I have been walking down the philosophy road as well… a few thoughts.
* Socrates offers the cardinal virtues (temperance, courage, wisdom, and justice) in The Republic [Plato]. Justice is a bit murky, up for debate, and the topic of a large portion of the book. My interpretation is something like “the ability to feel anger and its causes,” especially in an altruistic way.
* The Prince [Machiavelli] notes the best leaders are the ones who possess virtù – something like ‘the will to power, and suggests it is perhaps preferable to exist with moral nihilism to be the best leader.
* Another interesting track is to consider how humans differ from animals. On Human nature [EO Wilson] notes four ways (altruism, religion, aggression, and sexuality) – these are not virtues per se, but a way homo sapiens map onto the world, and somewhat related.
I wonder if virtue could be thought of as 'moral force' - lifeforce that helps us shepherd 'the good' into existence, or resist something 'bad', from becoming real. Machiavelli might disagree with the good/bad dichotomy and simplify to 'the power to do'. This would put vision and virtue on different tracks, though.
interesting question nan and great exploration on vision - in some ways I wholeheartedly agree, and in some ways I’m not too sure; I know for a fact that there are undersupplied things in my life (like decisiveness towards my values, of which I am, well, undecided) but as for a virtue that is undersupplied, in general/humanity, today? that’s a steep question and to that I answer, I don’t think there is one.
virtues that are lacking within me and perhaps the people around me are on the contrary in opposite parts of the world. an easy one is self-ambition in my world, I grow up and continue to be in an atmosphere that encourages compliance, the way things should be, respect for elders and filial piety in a way that stifles personal growth; but in another culture, this self-momentum is like an avalanche, with belief and confidence and risk-taking that comes in spades, such that they sometimes forego collectivism, vision for the greater good, and their respect for elders is nothing more than saying hello to their parents once every six months.
another example that comes to mind is environmentalism. I am of the understand that we’re more environmentally conscious than ever before, but I know for a fact that given the choice between the $2 plastic bag or the $2.50 biodegradable plastic, I’d take the first (that is - if I’m not already bringing the $2 plastic bag I purchased six weeks ago with me)
I’ll have to mull over this one - maybe there’s an answer / maybe there isn’t, but thanks for sharing nam :))
on second thought, I just walked into a train after typing this comment and already have an answer - the ability to be bored. there’s about thirty of us here and every single one of us whipped out our phones upon sitting down. that was quick.
Read this post for more ideas.
https://limon.substack.com/p/10000-clones-post-differentiation
Values can drive value:
1. Invisible (from the outside)
2. Invisible is uncloneable
3. Invisible can accumulate in duration
4. Many co’s don’t even want to copy them
5. Invisible $X00B-$T strategies - 6 total
(On my desktop. written w my fmr CEO)
https://limon.substack.com/p/10000-clones-post-differentiation
I like this a lot Nan. I think something else that is undersupplied is then the forum for exploring the particular virtue in a centralised place. I'm not sure where to start if I wanted to explore competing different visions for the City I live in.
Wisdom.
Now, to find that can opener...
60-70% of the people want universal healthcare. VISION: This video shows exactly how to do it. Put the market on the SUPPLY side, & and put a single-payer on the DEMAND side. The first political party that learns how to talk both social AND market principles will enjoy a long political ascendancy. Full exploration of all principles is given in the full playlist, called "New Addition to Economics."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-3CSl7yo_I