I recommend getting familiar with the whole book before, or instead of, reading straight through it.
After familiarizing yourself with the book, try to answer this question, “Under what circumstances would it be a really great idea to have read this book in whole or in part, and which parts?” I suggest that practice because it has served me very well with nonfiction — especially with primarily methodological publications.
Generally, I will acquire a book because its subject matter is related to my work, but not necessarily when I have time to sit and absorb the whole thing. So, I’ll sit with it long enough to read its introduction, review the contents, and read the openings to each chapter. Then I know under which circumstances I should return to it and drink deeply.
The question of what circumstances would prompt one to want these ideas doesn’t need to be a riddle or anything. I’ll explain as much of it as I can in the next page or so and at the beginning of each chapter and section. But, the details of the answer to this question — in what circumstances would it be important for you specifically to have read this book — well that all has to do with the life you have and the life you want to have. That’s information I can’t provide.
Do the stuff, but not necessarily right away.
This is a book of methods as much if not more than it is a book of theory. Throughout the book, you will find recommendations to do specific things in response to specific problems. My meta-recommendation: if you aren’t experiencing that problem or helping someone design a solution to that problem, don’t do that thing being recommended. All of these methods have contexts and are a bit limp if taken out of that context.
Deacon, why would you even bother to write that? That’s absurdly obvious.
I’ll tell you why. All of the content of this book is of a political nature — all of it. Yes, big parts of this book are about design theory, mathematics, theology, and shopping carts. But all of it is political. Some people doubt that I am lucidly advocating for aggressively political thought and action both when I am describing the common mistakes in thinking about the metaphysics involved in the evolution of the cornea and when I am telling people that it doesn’t really matter whether or not they vote. But I am.
People tend to think that whenever someone makes a political assertion, especially one which regards specific actions, that those actions are being recommended for everyone and maybe even regardless of circumstance. For instance, I will talk about models of democratic decision-making, collective organizational models, and the like. Since folks have decided that democracy is a good thing in itself, it’s easy to think that I’m saying that these democratic models need to be applied to everything. But, as I will demonstrate in part three of this book, democracy isn’t a good thing. It’s also not a bad thing. It’s just one set of different ways that we can organize social systems. And, you can either put in the work to be skilled at using it or it won’t do you and yours any favors. So, even when I’m talking about how to develop the skills to effectively contribute to a functioning democracy I’m not talking about anything that you should do. This is a book about what you can do. It’s about the unacknowledged options and the subtle but critically limiting constraints.
In fact, I hope that by the end of this work you’ll see that there are incredibly few qualities which an internally consistent worldview can hold to be actually good or bad proper. It’s just that those things which are actually moral in nature affect everything. That leads to the common mistake of thinking that there are a large number of elements in social existence which are inherently good and inherently bad.
To put a bow on all of that:
- This is a book of methods, most of which aren’t generally good or bad, morally speaking.
- There’s also some discussion of what is morally good and bad.
- The methods apply to different types of problems and opportunities and you won’t be in a position to use all of them.
- Use what works for you. This is a playbook, not a rulebook.
But, there’s one thing that I recommend that you do right now … well, two.
Below, there are two exercises. You could reasonably do them both within a half hour’s time — if you’re a person who’s really good at being fluidly honest with yourself. Allow yourself more time to get more benefit.
Reading through these exercises and thinking about them, but not doing them, won’t do much for you. Understanding the exercise isn’t the point. Even if you’ve done this exercise, or something similar before, do it again. Instead of thinking, “I already know this.” try, “I can go deeper with this idea than I have before.” Instead of, “I’m not the kind of person who thinks this way.” try, “A no-commitment thought experiment cannot hurt me, and I might learn something new about myself.”
Exercise Objectives Once completed, a little reflection on what it was like to do these exercises will reveal a bit of the potential of intentional and structured inquiry. That’s where all social systems design begins. And, if you feel the cognitive stretch that can come from doing these exercises with deep honesty, then you can understand the general kind of labor and struggle involved in the work of designing sovereignty.
It’s not who you are. It’s who you think you aren’t that holds you back. — Jean-Michel Basquiat
Both of these exercises fall into a larger set of practices which help a person to integrate the disparate aspects of themselves. Here we are mostly working to integrate the emotions and the intellect. Both exercises also loosen the hold of personal narratives and unproductive baggage, which is necessary if you want to change your trajectory. So, give ’em a try and then reflect on these objectives and see if you managed to get these benefits for yourself. Also, watch for the benefits to show up in conversations and shower thoughts over the next few days.
exercise one — How Valuable Can You Be?
- Think about what you do commercially that provides economic value to the world.
- Whether you’re a business owner, an employee, or both, and also if your work is domestic in nature, there are tasks that you perform, problems you think through, and communications you’re responsible for. That’s what you do for the world. And, there’s a difference between the state things are in before you do them and the state that things are in when you’re done. That difference is the value you provide. So, think of the details of each in both qualitative and quantitative terms.
- Imagine that tomorrow you have to have a conversation with your boss or immediate supervisor, or your biggest client, or even your family — whoever it is that you are responsible to. In this conversation, you have to tell your that person that you will now be charging ten times more for what you provide.
- It’s non-negotiable that it’s ten times more. That’s the exercise, not 50% more, not double. You are adding a zero to whatever you currently ask for in compensation. It might sound nuts, especially if your work is domestic or if you’re a wage employee, but that’s the exercise.
- Do the actual math on what that would mean. Make sure that you know what ten times your gross income or compensation would be in the context of what you do before you move on.
- Now, before you have that conversation, you have to figure out how to change what you provide so that this is actually a good deal for the person you’re going to talk to.
- Write down one hundred things or more that you could change about what you do which would make it worthwhile for the person you’re talking to.
- It has to be at least a hundred things.
- Recognize that you can use any amount of the increased sum to provide an increase in value, but you don’t have to.
- Remember, this exercise isn’t about how you would benefit or how it would change your life to increase your income by ten times. This exercise is about imagining what you could provide that makes it a no-brain-er for someone else to provide you with that income.
exercise two — How Bad Are Your Enemies?
- Think of three people whom you believe are ruining their lives and the lives of others.
- Try to make them very different people, at least in terms of how they relate to you. Like, maybe one of them is a family member you’ve known your whole life. One could be a coworker who grates on you. And, one could be a politician or a celebrity.
- Write each other their names at the top of a sheet of paper.
- Then tear into these people like you were doing a roast that doesn’t have to be funny. Write down a slew of accusations and belittlements that cut to the bone.
- Your criticisms have to be, or get to be — depending on how you look at it, specific and exacting. If you’re feeling adjectives and abstract judgements, throw ’em in. But, what’s important are the nouns and verbs. What specific actions have they done or failed to do, to and with whom, and for how many peanuts?
- You can throw this away or burn it later. No one ever has to see it.
- You are more than welcome to use more than one sheet of paper each, if you feel a real purge bubbling up — I certainly have.
- Resist the urge to do this part verbally. Putting the critique down on paper concretizes and externalizes what you’re carrying around — and may not need to keep carrying around.
- Now, take a break. Maybe freshen your mug or glass. The next step is a doozy.
- Here’s the hard part, look at everything you wrote and ask the following questions:
- How does what they’re doing contribute to their own survival, comfort, pleasure, and identity?
- Where might they have learned that? And, what do you expect those experiences were like for them?
- Assume that they’re actually totally in the right to behave the way they do. Just for a moment. What else would have to be true about the world for that to make sense? Go slow. Be detailed. Sit with it. Can you actually know that those things aren’t true?
- If you wrote a lot of criticisms then it may be impractical to question all of them, but resist the urge to question the ones that feel innocuous. Question what hurts. Question what disturbs your peace.
- Don’t ask or answer any of these questions in a general way. Look at the specific accusations and give specific answers for the individual accusations that feel most harsh and painful.
Congratulations!
Now, with any luck, you just had a direct experience of yourself, maybe one you rarely have. Maybe not. If this kind of thinking is part of your norm, I commend you. You’re a rare gem of a human. If it isn’t, no worries. Even if it bothers you to the core, but you got through it, you’re in the right place. There is no solution to the problems in our society, organizations, families, or within ourselves that does not require cognitive discomfort.
Of course, not everyone did the exercises. Some number of people saw that they were being asked to do something and skipped straight past the instructions to here, or elsewhere in the book. Another group of people read through the instructions, imagined doing the exercise, and are satisfied with whatever understanding of the subject matter they gleaned from that. A few people hit that bit about doing stuff, thought something like, “If I have to do homework to understand some dude’s philosophy I’m out. If this guy can’t explain what he wants me to understand then this isn’t for me.” Those folks are mostly long gone by now. They put down the book and they’re not coming back.
No judgement.
There are Four Types of Response to these Exercise Prompts:
- people who do the exercises as described
- those who unemotionally skip over them
- others who get really offended by one or both of them
- another group I’ll describe in a minute
Regarding various bits of advice, requests, and instructions, I have been all of the above people. Those who won’t consider doing these exercises aren’t a different kind of person from those who will. All of us can play any of the above roles depending on the ask, the presentation, the present, and how we’re doing.
Group two, those who just skip the exercises, are people whose trust I have not yet earned. If you did the exercises with deep conviction then something about how I presented the exercises and myself was sufficient for you to extend some faith. You believed that these exercises might help you get something worth your time.
Group three complains, gets offended, sometimes throws literal fits. The complaints about exercise one usually goes something like, “This is awfully capitalist / greedy / exploitative / conservative / right-wing” or something similar. I’m talking about real objections I’ve gotten, sometimes from people who have paid me a non-negligible amount of money to help them with their problems. Saliently, the live courses that I’ve taught sell for four figures. And all of the content is available online and in a moderate stack of books which can be purchased for one or two figures each or checked out of the library.
Regarding the second exercise, I’ve been told both that it encourages the victim mentality and that it is inherently victim blaming. Remember, I am not the person providing the object of judgement. The person doing the exercise choses the target of their judgement, the content of their judgements, and the limits of their inquiry. Those who spitefully shirk or sneak around the exercises are people who haven’t earned confidence in themselves.
I’m gonna say that again.
It’s not that they don’t believe that the exercises are sound. They don’t believe that they have what it takes to get positive results from the exercise. They believe so deeply that if they charged more for what they do that they would be stealing from people that they cannot even ask the question in a playful way. They are so afraid that they’re the actual problem in social situations that they can’t entertain the possibility that the people they hate are real humans with real stories. Or, they are so ashamed of their own hatred that they can’t even name anyone they harbor hatred for in an exercise that might help them get rid of said hatred.
I’ve seen people turn their personal lives, relationships, businesses, and organizations around through deep inquiry around these questions. So, those who are experiencing problems in their personal and social lives who reject the invitation to do these exercises either just don’t believe me when I say that or they don’t trust themselves. The former shrug and move on, the latter get offended.
This third group, folks who won’t try something or admit that they won’t try it, they are the same people who believe that there are dangerous ideas and that opinions can do real violence. What they lack is the conviction that they can allow themselves the latitude to entertain thoughts they don’t believe and come back to themselves unscathed and potentially improved for their trouble. To have the courage to make that work, one has to know what is sturdy in themselves. #sorrynotsorry
And, I meant it when I said that I’ve been every one of these people in the case of some prompt. When people start talking to me about astrology, I’m usually in group three. I turn away from the notion that something rudimentary, common, and uncontrollable could be deeply and personally influential. It’s not just that I’m passing over it; I emotionally recoil from it. So, I’m right there too. Except when I’m at my best. When I’m at my best, I can entertain anyone’s ideas. I can take what shows promise and try it out and I can calmly pass over what is of no use.
There’s another group of people too, that forth group. These are the folks who go through the motions — sometimes very convincingly. Maybe they radically modify the exercise to fit their own perception of what they would be more comfortable with — straight away, without trying it as described at all. Or they give lip service to the exercise and pretend to try it. Sometimes they even fool themselves. They do the exercise exactly as they believe they should do it. They give answers they know will sound studious or enlightened. Sometimes a person is a personal development tourist, so they even know what will be considered the best answers, what will make them fit into the teacher’s pet crowd. But they always steer their inquiry away from the problem that’s really holding them back. Generally, they’ve got a solid wall built around a tight nugget of ego, limitation, and even malice.
I have been this person as well. In this position, the person doesn’t believe that they deserve the solution to their deep pain. They know they can do it. They are aware that the solution is within reach. They just won’t reach. Or, they are simply procrastinating the hard work because the identity they’ve cultivated, the security of their known suffering, or the comfort of coping mechanisms they know they’ll have to abandon are just too much to give up right now.
And, depending on the ask, depending on what the medicine is and for what ailment, I could be any of these people right now. If we’re being honest, so could you.
Summary
To get the most out of this book, recognize that it is a book of methods. And, because it’s a book, the methods will be here when you are ready to try them out. Some of the methods, like the two exercises above, are explicit and given in a linear set of clear instructions. Not everything can or should be spelled out like that. But, I assure you, nothing in this book is about absorbing facts or why you should believe some abstract truth. You don’t actually have to believe me at all, about anything, to get value out of this book.
So, you might be better off not taking my word for anything — if that makes you more likely to take action and try things yourself.
This a book about how things work and how you can make them work for you, your household, your company, your organization, and your community. If you treat it that way, and if I haven’t totally screwed up the articulation, then you stand to increase your integrity, your satisfaction, and your sovereignty in this beautiful and benighted world.
Hi!
Wow, you got through all of that. You must be into this kind of thing. You can stay apprised of all project updates by mashing this link and signing up for the sqglz newsletter. It comes out every one to several weeks and mostly just points to new pieces I’ve posted and projects by excellent humans in the world.
cheers.