Game C and Love As Choice

This is a member contribution by ChrisD. Submit your post here.


“And for the long game, imagine a world where everybody understood the full meaning of this simple idea: love is that which enables choice.

If you really get that, if you lived by that principle…if everybody in the world understood that thoroughly, the world would be a better place as cliché as it is. ”

—Forrest Landry


As I was watching Albert Kim’s presentation on Game C, I was immediately reminded by Forrest Landry’s quote, “Love is that which enables choice”. I found Landry’s quote to be particularly helpful in the context of Kim’s presentation in that the birth of Game C starts with choice. In order to have effective governance, good choice making is essential.

But because of existing power asymmetry, the capacity of choice making by the very influential few is disproportionately larger than the majority of the populace. The decisions of those influential few hugely impact the majority of the populace. Look no further than the economic crisis of 2008 and the subsequent bailouts of big banks and business. While the public can band together and force the hand of policymakers as with the George Floyd protests, that is not the manner in which policy is often designed. It usually takes a devastating event (like a prominent death or a natural disaster) to get people to enthusiastically respond because it is immediate and readily accessible proof of ongoing complex social problems.

But we cannot have governance that only acts on what is immediate because it means that we fail to prepare ahead to deal with problems down the road. To prepare requires us to have excellent sensemaking in order for us to be aware of ongoing trends and developments that can help us fend off existential risk. Right now, the ongoing social, ecological, technological developments are too fast and too complex for any individual to make sense of and respond to. That is why we need each other to co-ordinate in order to create adaptive systems that can adequately respond to our ever-changing world.


Since there is no one size fits all solution for governance as it is contingent on the participants involved, local considerations, etc., some communities may employ effective bottom-up participatory governance while others may use a top-down AI approach.


Enter Game C, a framework that Albert Kim presented on The Integral Stage, which proposes a plurality of good places in a networked, localized manner combined with an awareness of the good that is ever-changing. The communities are linked by a holistic notion of the good that is ever-changing, but the communities themselves and the links between them are highly resilient as well. That also requires people to know and have experience in forming strong relationships. Ideally, the attitude of “I just want the state to work so I can do my own thing” would be a thing of the past. Kim offers a promising vision of relationality without getting lost in utopic thinking.

A crucial piece to the puzzle to maintaining resilience within Game C communities will be deciding on what is relevant for the whole community and the network as a whole. Since there is no one size fits all solution for governance as it is contingent on the participants involved, local considerations, etc., some communities may employ effective bottom-up participatory governance while others may use a top-down AI approach.

The concept of narrowing down to what is most relevant is a concept that John Vervaeke calls relevance realization. While this means that every thought from every agent cannot be taken fully into account into the problem space because that would result in combinatory explosion, instead what it does is that it encourages a process in order to get to what is relevant to the whole community on behalf of the true, the good, and the beautiful.

This is where I see John Vervaeke’s concept of relevance realization having a practical application for designing systems of governance, the rationale behind collective sensemaking. What is relevant would differ for each community, but the point is that there would be multiple communities to choose from whether they be democratic, technocratic, etc.

It is important to remind ourselves why we are sensemaking and designing adaptive systems in the first place. It is because we want to make the most relevant choices for ourselves on this planet. Could we find ourselves in a loop of inquiry? Quite possibly, but that is also a choice. One of the choices on behalf of what is good, true, and beautiful is to be vulnerable and to bring your gifts out into the world where they have effects, intended and unintended. But when making a choice, remember Landry’s quote “Love is that which enables choice”.

Choose on the basis of love.



20 Comments

avatar

when all is lost, we seek the hand to pull us up. The love of survival is an equal measure of two, or more, no less, we are not constructed to be individuals, yet economics is the only method that says the individual is stronger than that of being equal.
We are competitive at drowning more than competition in altruistic power to raise something human through love.
The Stoa for example, will drown by being of only one in the drivers seat of choices, making decisions only on behalf of the one power to decide, and mute the possibilities to the ‘other’.
Learning to share power is the largest challenge, to raise another, because we are taught only one method and this method is the power of the individual in competition and possession.
No university can survive this power structure, hence the university collapse of only one method, to seek corporate superiority over seeking wisdom of humans.
Money neither buys love, nor does it purchase wisdom, both these are a construct of free will in scientific failure.
And failure, is the security to explore further, not explore repetitions.
Ie: space travel is not possible without gravity, nor is it possible without food, so far our space missions can do neither effectively, as the thermodynamics can not allow the total sum to these invented parts of survival using batteries.

avatar

Hmm, Wayne. Your comment on the “one power” of The Stoa leading to its drowning has me curious. You think power is being abused there? How am I differentiating myself, or at least how could I? Eventually, I’d like to everyone to be empowered through my project, though right now I’m retaining the reins.

avatar

you are a natural combiner, treat your favourites as ‘parents’ to your most important decisions, so the world is not ever on your shoulders, we are educated to be alone in our success of controlling others, this is called ‘leadership’. We are not of this construct because we are born of two guiding parents universally.
All I did, was search for new ‘parents’ in my crazy travels across oceans and countries, trailing my dunbar across the world with vague thoughts to return to those beautiful people i was part of and in their lives. No regrets, just now realistic of how pixi dust I was in doing little with all the events and people, yet they formed my decisions, even though I was in an amour plated life of resiliency and transience.
I read more to learn more, how does intelligence work, well it turns out Darwin did the Dunbar better than most, he was an incredible social satellite of loving people who do science and was never alone in sharing and caring, he communicated endlessly to all he met of significance in these excitements and built these excitements, I hope you see how poor we are at learning peoples truth to abilities, it is never the ‘lone’ human of success, it is the loving and passion to see others join in the fun.
I am a glassblower by trade and worked with the largest most specialized ballet of glass possible with humans, all because I could push a broom and open a door with a smile to help.
The rest was mostly circus and rainbows, not really much content of true meaning, yet still a unique world of crazy stuff pushing back against the maddening machine of repetition.
Should I rescue it? I don’t know, I can do both versions, extreme capitalism or justified civilian, again it is ego and not a purpose to greater purposes of the ‘whole’.
My thoughts today was again rescue, Rebel Wisdom has dropped the baton a bit and become introspective or stuck, the payment structure ends invention of all involved, there is no more struggle, understanding your feelings and memories of struggle is essential, we can only become impudent from becoming comfortable, then people choose theft rather than build, a sort of self entitlement that comes very naturally. (economics of hate)
Read things like the 1930’s time of invention, it was no bank of money or investors, it was a dust bowl. The best things ever, including vaccines, came from this era of struggle….And I may add, and people don’t like this part, the younger generation was wild about creative purpose.
So yes, my dad drove a car at seven years old, he never stops talking about it, because he was proud and true to the possible, not hindered by our ideas of impossible.

avatar

Mm, “parents” to my most important decisions! I do naturally see Noetic Nomads as a co-creative process. I see myself as a vessel and thus allowing the creative genius of everyone involved to flow through me. For example, Sunday’s big event was inspired by a session Chris proposed to talk with me about Noetic Nomads. I thought it was good timing to plan another event that same day – then love & craziness ensued!

Currently see NN as not just a non-capitalist project but an anti-capitalistic, pro-social experiment. How it pans out, we’ll see…

avatar

Even Elon Musk understands the capital process, he sold off everything he owns and gave away title to ownership, such a game he plays and can be free in an instant to start over.

avatar

The next awful stage might well be, sign up now, and learn how to start your own ‘rebel wisdom’, in five short weeks we can set you on a new course of adventure from a wealth of experience given generously by our experts in the field.

I hope not, there is much much more to go.

avatar

Agreed. That is the education system and marketing machine that we are used to. It strips the gift of the journey. Solution is not concentrated in one central node or hub but is dispersed over all that Is.

avatar

The gift of the journey! Love it, Chris! Structured courses *can* be extremely helpful. For example, Rebel Wisdom’s Sensemaking 101 was foundational in my spiritual growth over the summer.

But I do get the sense that many people can get addicted to the plenitude of superficial quick-fixes instead of exploring deep within themselves to uncover and confront their personal demons.

avatar

Sometimes I see my ego as my demon. To the point where I actually feel embarrassed to put forth something out of myself.

But this does seem to keep my ego under reasonable control. I think.

avatar

I think my “thing” is a “Game C” expression.

avatar

Hey Daniel! I believe proper integration and expression of the Ego befits a Game C mentality. Designating Ego as all “bad” is a dualistic either/or move, which doesn’t take into account nuance and context. When integrated with the whole of oneself, healthy expression of Ego includes such things as self-love and assertiveness.

avatar

It is Good to see your Thoughts about “Ego”. I understand that everything has a Good side and bad side (actually many nuances of both) and this would include “Ego”. After all “Ego” is part of CREATION.

Thank you for reminding me of these things. Too often I fall into the trap of believing that Ego is all negative. I fear being and seeming “selfish”.

I guess I am a primitive old thing, but I do try to make the best of me…and become More and Better.

“Self-Love”? Well. I do “Love” my imagination and kind heartedness (can’t stand mistreatment of Animals)…and, I suppose, all the stuff about Tribalism and Nomadism, that has flowed out of me. Some of it may be useful to someone, somewhere, someday.

“Assertiveness”? Difficult for me. I am shy about what comes out (or through) me. Only very few have touched what I am about. Fewer yet comprehend it. (usually because they don’t relate to it personally.)

avatar

It’s a beautiful remnant of our pro-social, tribal past to shy away from such things as individual Ego and Self. It’s a protective mechanism that has served us for aeons. We’ve lost some of that, but it can come back, and in a healthy way…

avatar

Good Friday Morning, Albert. After reading your above comment about the Tribal past having its influence on “Individual Ego”, I felt my Mind shift toward Better Understanding of the relationship between the needs of Societies and the Individual Egos that comprise them.

At best, they fulfill each other. The Good Individuals, “Mastering” their Egos, are the greatest asset to a Group. From them comes the Strengths of Goodness within a Tribe. Then this Good Strong Tribe provides fertile environment for the continued improvement of the Individual. In the wee Tribes of Humanity’s beginnings this relationship came more Naturally, with the needs of survival.

avatar

Yes, and even the Collective Tribe has an Ego of its own, which may be managed by other individual Tribes, the Meta-Tribe, and the totality of Nature Herself.

avatar

Isn’t that strange? Yesterday, I had briefly wondered if there was such a thing as “Collective Ego”? Did you read something that proposed this?

Managed by Nature? Transfer a Jungle Tribe out into the Desert, or Tundra and watch what happens. First of all they would immediately become aware of the difference. Then they would all (?) feel alienation.

So, Yes. I think I agree. Nature does have a role in the management of Tribal Ego.

But, what if the “Mega Tribe” is in many different regions of Nature? What would such an Collective Ego be like?

avatar

All Egos and all things that exist, really, are holons — parts which are also wholes. My individual Ego could be seen as a mishmash of billions of brain neurons, chemical and electrical signals coming from both within and outside my body, a constant interplay of many multitudes of conscious, subconscious, and unconscious forces, and so on. The idea of an atom — an indivisible unit — has yet to play out in reality.

A Meta-Tribe’s Ego could have a generalized will which emerges out of its constituent tribes, much like a national, regional, or ideological ethos.

avatar

Howdy, Albert. Still having problems in the “Chat Place”, but, at least, I am getting there. The chat window accepts my typing, but wont send to the discussion roster. But, I am happy with the progress.

You shared: “The idea of an atom — an indivisible unit — has yet to play out in reality.”

I Think an “Atom” is crystalized energy. Energy is focused Thought.

Your statement of: “A Meta-Tribe’s Ego could have a generalized will which emerges out of its constituent tribes, much like a national, regional, or ideological ethos.”

This is a valuable composition to me. An important Principle to be included.

“Narbarism” expresses this “Generalized Meta-Tribe Will” to some extent.

avatar

“Holons” Thanks Albert. “Holon” will be a new word and concept for the Narbarian Language.

Can “Holons” increase and decrease? Be “static”? (un-moving)?

avatar

Is Individual Personality a “Holon”?

Leave a Reply

RSS
YouTube
Follow by Email