OK. But let's assume we could at least agree on LaVey's complaint: "It's too bad stupidity isn't painful." The idea being to select against some (special) formulation of innovative/crazy/creative/lucky behavior for which we have an accounting and that accounting shows "bad" (leads to costs we don't want in spite of the rewards).
And what if there are regions of the landscape that can only be reached by such bad behavior. Ideally, rather than eliminate the people who engage in the bad behavior, we'd *corral* them and deploy them intentionally. These useful idiots, one of which will become the Great Man, could help us make the whole system better, merely at the risk of a delusional belief in "merit", mostly believed only by the other (corralled) idiots. On 12/27/18 2:25 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Let's say there is a great woman, and through my heavy-handed intervention I > prevent her from becoming great. If you buy the idea that she was worthy of > that title, and you buy the idea that she came to greatness through Personal > Responsibility, then the perturbation I impose on her will not stop her, will > it? I've simply given her another opportunity to prove herself worthy of > forcing others to serve as her scaffolding. > > Anyway, this is all assuming there is even a game worth playing and that > concepts of merit or greatness even mean anything at all. -- ☣ uǝlƃ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
