Enrichment, Obligations, and Other Musings.

I was thinking a bit more about the appeal of litrpg stories, aided and abetted by my most recent read (The Legend of Randidly Ghosthound), and thought I'd start at the top.

Someone once joked that they needed 'enrichment', the same way that animals in a zoo do. 'Joke' probably isn't quite the right word here, because I think it's actually true - people need a certain level of stimulation.

Obviously, there are healthy and unhealthy types of stimulation (escaping into a fantasy novel, writing fanfic, drugs, creating 'drama' at work, etc) and ideally we would have rich and rewarding lives that give us that level of stimulation in positive ways.

I think this is also somewhat related to our attitudes towards risk. Or rather, I think about a study that showed as more systems are in place to make something safer (like car manufacturing), people start taking more risks, so that the level of risk tends to stay the same. On average, that is. Obviously different people have different levels of what's acceptable.

This, btw, also reminds me a bit of what's required to get in the 'flow'. 'Flow' is something that's interested me for quite a while, because it's part of what makes living... fun. It's rewarding. Maybe I should even say 'enriching'.

There are quite a few studies on how people achieve that state (here's one as an example), and from what I remember it goes like this:

You need something that is challenging, but not too challenging (or it's overwhelming and people just give up). It needs to be somewhat complex, something with a clear goal, and something 'fun'.

I first heard of the concept with regards to sports, and I think that's the focus of most studies, but I don't think it's limited to sports or physical activity. I think you can get into a state of flow when coding, for example. Or picking parts for shipping. 

I do think modern society is... well, lacking in enrichment and stimulation like that. At least, most jobs are. That's part of the reason it's so hard to stay motivated for so many low paying jobs. 

That's just the tip of the iceberg though. Because I think modern society makes it too easy to kind of sleepwalk through life. I got to thinking about that because of something that happened in The Legend of Randidly Ghosthound, though it's not a direct relation.

Randidly Ghosthound is a character in one of those system integration stories in LitRPG. Basically modern life got destroyed when earth got integrated into a system with game-like elements. Magic, swords, etc. Like many of these, Randidly soon becomes quite overpowered... though I like that it addresses some of the common issues with that sort of character. (i.e. for all that they note the problems with 'might makes right', the solution for the protagonist is almost always to become stronger. Basically their might makes right, but it's still a system where the most powerful character gets to dictate what happens. In this case a) he struggles to deal with his overpoweredness and b) because of some shenanigans on another planet he knows he won't be able to defeat one of the upcoming system challenges, which means he's also quite focused on trying to build other people up so that they can succeed when he can't help). 

Anyways, there was an interesting incident at one point - another planet was struggling in the system. He learned about it through an acquaintance, and wanted to help... but the person he met flat out didn't want him to save the planet. Basically that guy's daughter had been the hero of their planet, and died. He resented the rest of the population for putting that burden on his daughter, and still expecting other people to save them. (That doesn't quite feel like a good summary, but it's close enough).

It raised a whole slew of issues, from what Randidly's obligation was to this guy, whether that request took precedence over his own desire to help the planet, whether having the ability to help meant he was required to, and a bunch of other things. But what I wanted to focus on the most was how having one person step up as a hero allowed a lot of other people to... not.

That in a way, other people are able to coast, to stay weak. They don't have to push themselves to continue growing in strength.

Which I have mixed feelings about, because on the one hand I do have an ideal of a fully actualized individual. i.e. someone mindful and aware and capable of handling whatever comes their way.

On the other hand, nobody can do it all, and a large part of how society works is having people specialize in the things they can... and have friends or resources available for the things they can't. Like how one person might become a car mechanic, and another a computer expert. Both take a long time to master, and most people don't have the time or energy to master both (or maybe they can for those two, but don't have time to master cooking. Or some other task.) Point is we often need to outsource important tasks.

And yet... we still have to know how to evaluate the experts. How do you know that your car mechanic did a good job? Or that your computer expert knows what they're doing?

Hmmmm.

I suppose there's really two issues with the OP hero then. One - people expecting and demanding them to risk their lives saving them; and two - forgetting that even if you're not the one doing the job you still have a role to play. 

That latter one requires a bit more explanation, I think. 

Basically that whole scenario reminded me of how people will outsource things (like politics) without doing their due diligence. Like supporting Trump when Trump has repeatedly shown he was untrustworthy and shouldn't be in power. I know most people don't have the time to truly dig into politics and come to a well-thought out position, but we still have to do our due diligence when we're empowering someone to such a degree... and quite frankly anyone still supporting Trump hasn't done their due diligence. Or just doesn't care. 

Maybe you can't be the president, or governor, or member of congress... but that doesn't mean you should just tune everything out and let immoral and incompetent assholes win office without a fight.

Too True

https://mastodon.social/@jensorensen/110838313154327216

I'd feel a lot better about plans to colonize Mars or tech leader plans for 'sustainability' if they showed any talent for addressing today's issues.

How can you be trusted to ensure a future 100 or even 1000 years from now, when you aren't doing the work here and now?

Especially if you're not addressing the things that make our current system unsustainable? 

And how can any such future be worthwhile, when you're writing off most of humanity?

If it's not geared towards making a sustainable society for everyone, and if it doesn't involve addressing the social dilemmas that make sustainability difficult, it's flawed from the start. 

Trump Indictment

The number of pundits and opinion pieces trying to defend Trump is just disgusting. 

On Leadership Pipelines

You may have noticed that in one post I was complaining about the military plan for officer professional development, and in the next praising it.

That's because there are two extremes - the army policy is bureaucratic and inflexible (unless you're a West Pointer or similarly connected individual, where things can be... Different. For example if you know someone in command who asks for you by name, you might get around some of it. Or at least have more of a say on when you'll check certain boxes. I think. I don't have a lot of experience with that but I've heard of it happening. Also sometimes personnel officers will promising some future assignment if you take a crappy one, or if they're worried about retaining you.)

Regardless, it's bureaucratic and inflexible for most, but at least there is a plan.

Civilian companies, otoh, put a lot of the onus on you.

It's up to you to decide to take a class, which your company may pay for. It's up to you to ask for a promotion, or get a cert. 

Obviously, different places of work do this to different degrees, and you can find some civilian places that do more to make sure employees are taking the positions that will give them the experience needed for more skilled positions, but for the most part that's been my experience.

And here's the thing - those jobs? Like being a field grade officer? Or joining the C-suite? They tend to require quite a bit of effort to get people with the right skills. 

You might be able to learn them on the job, though it'd probably be rough and you'd have a steep learning curve. (I suspect the military focuses on those career paths because even just knowing ranks, military jargon, and military culture is hard to do from the outside - they're not going to make a civilian a general no matter how talented they seem at managing an organization).

All that talent people claim they need? It requires a LOT of work. Some people have family resources that allow them to develop that themselves. Like paying for college. Getting internships. Etc.

The military is interesting because so many enlisted don't have that type of support. In a very rough way, the structure and support the military provides can make up for that. (And they can interfere on a far deeper level.)

I also think a lot of it has to do with expectations.

So often, as you reach a rank, the people around you will say things like 'as a future company commander ______' or 'now that you're an NCO _____'

Like corporals - who have the same grade and pay as a specialist, but because a corporal is considered a Non-Commissioned Officer they're expected to take on more of a leadership role.

And most of the soldiers live up to those expectations. (In my experience, people generally do. And they'll live down to them if you have low expectations, too).

That's not all there is to it, of course.

There's also an element of trust involved.

Like - people generally want to do their thing. Part of why soldiers want to go to war zones is because you can spend years during peace time training, and training, and never knowing if you're really ready. You don't really get the chance to do what you've been training for. 

So when people don't want to do their thing? It's normally because they've grown cynical, disheartened, etc.

Bad leadership.

That holds true in civilian life... Complaints that people aren't willing to work hard anymore? Maybe take a long, hard look at why.