I’m curious if you or other readers think meaningness would benefit from a system that makes it easier to maintain, or if you think this would be more likely than not to fail?
There’s something nice about what you’ve written on this website in that the nebulosity and nuance are built in. It takes time and active effort for a reading to digest this content, and there’s not much of a way to shortcut things. You do a good job of trying to avoid readers seeing this as a silver bullet, and it seems like that’s hard to offer when you turn something into a system. Systems can often be attractive because they appear to be transformative silver bullets that are also general dialectics.
On the other hand, having practices or support in trying to maintain the complete stance would likely be a huge help.
Does meaningness want a system?
I’m curious if you or other readers think meaningness would benefit from a system that makes it easier to maintain, or if you think this would be more likely than not to fail?
There’s something nice about what you’ve written on this website in that the nebulosity and nuance are built in. It takes time and active effort for a reading to digest this content, and there’s not much of a way to shortcut things. You do a good job of trying to avoid readers seeing this as a silver bullet, and it seems like that’s hard to offer when you turn something into a system. Systems can often be attractive because they appear to be transformative silver bullets that are also general dialectics.
On the other hand, having practices or support in trying to maintain the complete stance would likely be a huge help.