Editing Game B
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Rather, Game B players gather together to feel their way up each hill with their toes, sensing for the loamy untrodden ground beneath them, slowly inching forward, listening for signals from one another, adjusting at each step to orient themselves toward the flag that is barely visible. In that way, just like a game, Game B describes a modus operandi as much as it does a goal, although for now, the former can be brought into sharper focus than the latter. | Rather, Game B players gather together to feel their way up each hill with their toes, sensing for the loamy untrodden ground beneath them, slowly inching forward, listening for signals from one another, adjusting at each step to orient themselves toward the flag that is barely visible. In that way, just like a game, Game B describes a modus operandi as much as it does a goal, although for now, the former can be brought into sharper focus than the latter. | ||
Defining Game B precisely would suffer from the reductionist [[Game A]] tendencies. Looking at the constituents of Game B from multiple angles might help to elucidate the concept. Here are some different constructions that point to Game B: | Defining Game B precisely would suffer from the reductionist [[Game A]] tendencies. Looking at the constituents of Game B from multiple angles might help to elucidate the concept. Here are some different constructions that point to Game B: | ||
Line 315: | Line 316: | ||
=== What is Game B? === | === What is Game B? === | ||
<blockquote>"Game B is notoriously difficult to think and talk about for the very good reason that if you were using the conceptual structures that came out of Game A to do so, you may very well be poisoning the well." - Jordan Hall</blockquote>Defining Game B precisely would suffer from the reductionist | <blockquote>"Game B is notoriously difficult to think and talk about for the very good reason that if you were using the conceptual structures that came out of Game A to do so, you may very well be poisoning the well." - Jordan Hall</blockquote>Defining Game B precisely would suffer from the reductionist Game A tendencies. One of the ways to work in navigating this problem is to do a parallax perspective, where are you looking at something from multiple angles. Here are some different constructions that point to Game B: | ||
#Game B is the flag on the hill for an omni-win | |||
#Game B is the environment that maximizes collective intelligence, collaboration, and increasing omni-consideration. | # Game B is the flag on the hill for Game B is an omni-win civilisation that maximizes human flourishing | ||
#Game B is building or developing | # Game B is the environment that maximizes collective intelligence, collaboration, and increasing omni-consideration. | ||
#Game B is establishing coherence within complex systems | # Game B is building or developing capacity to navigate complexity without resorting to complicated systems | ||
#Game B is a meta-protocol for hyper-collaboration | # Game B is establishing coherence within complex systems | ||
#Game B is the infinite game where the purpose is to continue playing. | # Game B is a meta-protocol for hyper-collaboration | ||
# Game B is the theoretically optimal | # Game B is the infinite game where the purpose is to continue playing. Game A is the finite game where the purpose is to win | ||
#Game B must orient | # Game B is the theoretically optimal conditions for creative collaboration and thus maximal innovation | ||
#Game B is a new mode of societal, economic, and political organization that leverages people's authentic, long-term interests towards a healthier, more cooperative society and | # Game B must orient it’s primary innovation capacity towards cultivating individual and collective sovereignty and an awareness of how choices actually show up in the world more than the rate at which it increases individual and collective power | ||
# Game B is a new mode of societal, economic, and/or political organization that leverages people's authentic, long-term interests towards a healthier, more cooperative society and increased well-being. A Game B system is any cooperative, mutually-beneficial system that can outcompete exploitative, adversarial systems through manifest appeal and willful, voluntary participation. | |||
It may also be helpful to define Game B in terms of what it is not. As [https://www.ulixeadigital.com/topic/37-what-game-b-is-to-me/?tab=comments#comment-54 Ariadnae] writes: | |||
* It's not an ideology nor a political stance; much different than Right and Left, which both strive to find ways for a fairer, more productive and sustainable Game A, Game B is an attempt at freeing myself from any ideology, and losing bias filters in an attempt at seeing the world for what it really is | |||
* It's not an Apocalyptic view of the world; actually, the world in all its manifestations of cultures and extremes is so plastic, resilient and adaptable | |||
* It's not an esoteric, psychedelic, cult-like movement trying to blow-up the classical success-based hierarchies of the Western world; rather it's a sober attempt at analyzing human spirituality, psychology and sociology in order to understand what drives us as individuals and collectives and an attempt at leveraging old traditions and new discoveries to build everlasting ever longer bridges across people with a myriad of backgrounds, cultures, languages, and religions and take the best of each in order to make sense of humanity as such | |||
* It's not a utopia in the making, nor a movement aimed at replacing markets and money with some obscure technology-driven new social order; rather it's an attempt at understanding how money, technology, and political systems shape the world order as it is and discovering ways to advance societies via more creative, cooperative and sustainable low-resolution forms of collaboration, to support the success of healthy markets and societies | |||
* It's not a secret brotherhood of people armed with "bullshit baffles brains" jargon talking in such complicated words that laymen would find hard to understand; it's every one of us who is trying to make sense of the world using precise and accurate speech, evidence-based facts and scientific inquiry methods; we strive to make complex theories simple enough for the individual understanding but without simplifying things to the point they would lose their essence and value of truth | |||
* It's not a counter-reaction to the great thinkers of yesterday and today; it's an attempt at distillating and integrating the Truth in all that the classical and contemporary thinkers have to say, in order to create a round and comprehensible story of who we are and where we are heading as individuals and collectives | |||
Game B players are already everywhere, and Game B is already emerging. #gameb is merely a means to make the organism self-aware, to show its players that they are already in community. | |||
=== How Does Game B Emerge and Evolve? === | === How Does Game B Emerge and Evolve? === | ||
As [https://www.facebook.com/groups/1447251258838263/permalink/2491255381104507/ Jordan Hall mentions], there are at least three kinds of effort. All three are parallel - doing very different things but at the same time. | As [https://www.facebook.com/groups/1447251258838263/permalink/2491255381104507/ Jordan Hall mentions], there are at least three kinds of effort. All three are parallel - doing very different things but at the same time. | ||
*'''Amelioration efforts''' - These are the things that are focused on minimizing the harm that Game A does as it winds down. From seed banks to cleaning plastic out of the oceans to preventing catastrophic war. | |||
*'''Transition efforts (Transition B)''' - prototyping new models, building necessary infrastructure, taking well | * '''Amelioration efforts''' - These are the things that are focused on minimizing the harm that Game A does as it winds down. From seed banks to cleaning plastic out of the oceans to preventing catastrophic war. | ||
*'''Game B Proper (Game B)''' - Consciously and carefully co-creating an | * '''Transition efforts (Transition B)''' - prototyping new models, building very likely necessary infrastructure, taking well considered and intentionally evolving swings at chunks of the larger problem (eg decentralized education models, permaculture at different levels of scale, much but not all of "green tech", etc.) | ||
* '''Game B Proper (Game B)''' - Consciously and carefully co-creating an Emergent and scalable new game. | |||
It is important to note that there are no plans or strategizing to get to Game B because it is hard to plan for emergence. As a collective, each of us discern with your full self what the best “next action” and what is the “adjacent possible”, and move in that direction. | |||
Through analogy, Game B players gather together to feel their way up each hill with their toes, sensing for the loamy untrodden ground beneath them, slowly inching forward, listening for signals from one another, adjusting at each step to orient themselves toward the flag that is barely visible through the gloaming. | Through analogy, Game B players gather together to feel their way up each hill with their toes, sensing for the loamy untrodden ground beneath them, slowly inching forward, listening for signals from one another, adjusting at each step to orient themselves toward the flag that is barely visible through the gloaming. | ||
So, to play Game B is to eschew reductionism, prescription and strategizing | So, to play Game B is to eschew reductionism, prescription and strategizing and to instead embrace complexity, uncertainty and emergence. It is to adopt epistemic humility and deep listening as a default mode of engagement to notice what is emerging that may be omni-win. It is to cultivate a different form of knowing that leans less heavily on the propositional forms of the past, and more on the on relational coherence, intersubjectivity and participation to support that which encourages the universal flourishing of life. | ||
=== How Would Game B | |||
<blockquote>“The omni-win-win system actually outcompetes the win-lose system, while obsoleting win-lose dynamics itself.” - Daniel Schmachtenberger</blockquote>If we | === How Would Game B bear Game A? === | ||
<blockquote>“The omni-win-win system actually outcompetes the win-lose system, while obsoleting win-lose dynamics itself.” - Daniel Schmachtenberger</blockquote>If we are able to create a social technology to hypercoordinate with others, then Game B would better at innovation than Game A. Then the only way to beat it would be to coordinate even better which is in and of itself a more Game B solution. | |||
=== Origins of Game B === | === Origins of Game B === | ||
As [https://www.facebook.com/groups/1447251258838263/permalink/2462625890634123/ Jordan Hall describes on Facebook], a series of meetings happened in | As [https://www.facebook.com/groups/1447251258838263/permalink/2462625890634123/ Jordan Hall describes on Facebook], a series of meetings happened in mid 2012-2013. On the third meeting, the group pondered on the concept of Game B. The name of Game B and proposed it on their fourth meeting. By their fifth meeting, there were about thirty people in the group and the first formalization was proposed. This group included Jordan Hall, Eric Weinsten, Seb Pacquet and Venessa Miemis (now Hall). | ||
Jim Rutt mentions that Game B emerge in 2013 as an evolution from a failed attempt to launch the Emancipation Party. Ultimately this kicked off "Deep Code" where Jim assigned Jordan Hall the task of "going as deep as necessary" to establish the basis of any possible "Game B". | |||
Game B | Game B as an operating group fell apart over two directions: personal change vs institutional change. The group went into “spore mode” and disbanded and were to use the concepts in ways that they saw fit. Game B got reintroduced by Bret Weinstein on the Joe Rogan Experience in Dec 2017. | ||
Daniel Schmachtenberger started | === What Are Some Design Criteria of Game B? === | ||
Although Game B does not have an exact vision, there are design criteria that it may solve to tackle the problems that we face. | |||
Daniel Schmachtenberger started The Emergence Project to develop a set of necessary and sufficient design criteria for developing comprehensive solutions. Their vision is of an omni-considerate, integrally developed, effectively and spontaneously self-governing global civilization. | |||
An omni-consider civilization is one where the incentive of any actor (individual or group), must be rigorously aligned with the well-being of all other agents in the system and of the commons writ large. | |||
==== The Emergence Model ==== | ==== The Emergence Model ==== | ||
Through the Emergence Project, a model was created. The model is derived from Ken | Through the Emergence Project, a model was created. The model is derived from Ken Wilbur's Integral Theory and draws upon the work of leading contemporary thinkers to: | ||
* Include a comprehensive taxonomy of necessary and sufficient “metastructures” that support human civilization | * Include a comprehensive taxonomy of necessary and sufficient “metastructures” that support human civilization | ||
Line 382: | Line 391: | ||
All factors that condition human behavior live in these quadrants. Each of the quadrants is fundamental and irreducible with respect to the others, so these categories are both necessary and sufficient for inventorying all sources of human conditioning. | All factors that condition human behavior live in these quadrants. Each of the quadrants is fundamental and irreducible with respect to the others, so these categories are both necessary and sufficient for inventorying all sources of human conditioning. | ||
Metastructures in each of the four quadrants co-evolve and co-influence each other in complex ways, and must all be | Metastructures in each of the four quadrants co-evolve and co-influence each other in complex ways, and must all be factored together to effectively evolve society. Most social philosophies have emphasized one of these areas as fundamental, leading to projects focused in that area to the exclusion of the others. Such a reductionist orientation simply is inadequate for systems as complex, and interconnected as human society and the biosphere. | ||
Below are examples of metastructure shifts, by category. Note that these do not include all design criteria. | Below are examples of metastructure shifts, by category. Note that these do not include all design criteria. | ||
Line 547: | Line 556: | ||
=== What Are Some Design Criteria of Transition B? === | === What Are Some Design Criteria of Transition B? === | ||
Similarly, there are also design criteria for | Similarly, there are also design criteria for Transition B system. Daniel Schmachtenberger wrote about some design criteria for the transitional system here. | ||
The Transition B system must be able to interface with the current economic system. Thus | The Transition B system must be able to interface with the current economic system. Thus it must be able to move resources from the current system into the transitional system. It must: | ||
* Lead to a new attractive basin that moves a critical mass of resources to the new system, that past a tipping point becomes auto-poetic. Auto-poetic means that the system is capable of growing and maintain itself. | |||
** Requires offering enough increased advantage over the current system, with enough ease of use, to reach the tipping point towards auto-catalysis. | |||
* Avoid/ be resilient to attack from the current economic system including any of its associated systems (media, law, military, etc). It also needs to be resilient to attack from and able to outcompete any other emerging autopoietic systems that don’t vector towards post-transition viability. | |||
* Scale as fast as the current system might collapse. | |||
* Move economic capacity to choice making agents/processes with higher omni-consideration. | |||
The Transition B system also must serve as a bridge to the post-transition Game B system. It must: | The Transition B system also must serve as a bridge to the post-transition Game B system. It must: | ||
*Not be capturable. | |||
*Be oriented to evolve into the post-transitional system; must not be oriented to maintain its transitional structure. | * Not be capturable. | ||
*Not increase the probability of any near term catastrophic risk scenarios or tipping points towards long term risks. | * Be oriented to evolve into the post-transitional system; must not be oriented to maintain its transitional structure. | ||
* | * Not increase the probability of any near term catastrophic risk scenarios or tipping points towards long term risks. | ||
===How | * Vector towards the post-transitional system as quickly as viable; must allocate the resources to building the post-transitional economic infrastructure. | ||
#Understand the truth | === How Can You Move Forward? === | ||
#Develop your sovereignty | There have been many suggested ways for you to move forward without understanding of your specific context. Jordan Hall provide these meta-principles: | ||
#Develop the right relationship | |||
#Develop coherence with others | # Understand the truth | ||
# Develop your sovereignty | |||
# Develop the right relationship | |||
# Develop coherence with others | |||
Below are some suggestions by Jordan Hall that have been roughly edited. | Below are some suggestions by Jordan Hall that have been roughly edited. | ||
==== Recognize That You Need to Change First ==== | |||
==== | It starts with you. You can only control yourself. In order to create the change that you wish to see, you need to shift yourself first. In some ways, you are a microcosm of the larger whole and in solving problems in yourself, you are learning how to do so for the whole as well. | ||
==== Move Slowly ==== | |||
Recognize that the journey to Game B will take time. It likely won’t be realized for 2 - 3 generations from now. Compared to our current environment, which places importance on speed, Game B moves at a much slower pace because that is the pace of meaningfulness. As Jordan Hall says, “Slow is smooth, and smooth is fast. So become smooth first.” | |||
==== Have Infinite Humility ==== | |||
==== | Jordan Hall recommends infinite humility. This means that we all probably don't know much. Recognize that everything that you learned that got you to who you are today may not be useful in moving forward. The models, the frameworks, the habits, the strategies, and the relationships that got you to the top of your own niche in Game A are likely not going to be useful as we move to Game B. If you have been optimizing in any sense, you probably have ignored other important stuff along the way while you are engaging in hillclimb. That means you are not whole. Starting from a beginner’s mindset and unlearning will take time. | ||
==== Heal ==== | |||
We have significantly destroying the capacities of human beings at industrial scale with our current systems (e.g. educational, economic, etc). Remediating that damage and bringing people back to the basic capacity to be mature adults who can use the whole of their mind to be thinking, and not simulated thinking, is really quite hard. | |||
The healing piece is a massive issue. Healing is going to be an individual journey because each individual has their own history. | |||
==== Get Rid of the Malware ==== | |||
Using a different analogy, we each are filled with malware from growing up. We have to figure out how to actually reboot our individual system. It is a non trivial problem. Fortunately, it's a solvable problem, it can be done. Or at least, it seems reasonably solvable. | |||
==== Learn to Use Your Full Self ==== | |||
==== | The more you're able to use your most full self, the more you're able to become whole. As anybody who's ever done anything meaningful knows, it is important to learn how to actually use the whole self, the whole of your body and mind. Tune your the instrument that is yourself. One way could be meditation. Jordan Hall has noticed that the answer to the question of what to do is only answerable by that instrument. | ||
==== Embody Knowledge ==== | |||
Be rather than think. Even though much of Game B is talking intellectually, at the end of the day, it’s still mostly embodiment. As John Vervake says, there is a difference between intellectual propositional knowing and embodied participatory knowing. | |||
There are things that you absorb into yourself, and you are increasing capacity as that happens. At the basic level, you are not thinking about it, and any degree to which you're thinking about it is getting in the way. An example is that it is hard to learn how to golf by verbal instructions. Your whole body needs to have the feeling of golfing to learn. | |||
We should continue to explore the deeply forgotten foundations of our participatory knowing, and really grappling with all levels, from participatory, through perceptual, to perspectival, and to propositional knowing. | |||
==== '''Figure Your Vocation''' ==== | |||
As Jordan Hall says, “First, stop carrying that which is not yours to carry. I find that lots and lots of people, and probably for quite good reasons, endeavor to do more than that is theirs to do. This is largely because they can't find it to people to carry those parts and oftentimes, they need a whole bunch to get anything done. Well, become more and more skillful at not doing that. Be careful to carry less and less of what is not yours to do. | |||
Second, really fully carry that which is yours to do. Sense the parameters and the shape and the characteristics of why you're here. What is your unique capacity in the context of a larger story and become masterful at it, like 100% commitment. I mean, 100%, no compromise. Doing whatever is necessary in yourself, to make yourself capable of fully bringing into the world, that aspect of the bigger story, that is your responsibility. “ | |||
Thor's hammer is a good metaphor. Thor's hammer is infinitely heavy, unless it's exactly yours to carry. But if you are worthy, then it's infinitely light. In doing so, more bandwidth and more energy will flow through the system. On the other side, stop carrying something and trying to do something that is not very, very deeply specifically yours to do. Otherwise, it becomes infinitely heavy and you'll become Atlas holding the Earth. It will just flatten you. | |||
When you find your calling, you learn to say no to things that are not in alignment with your calling. This will be able you to say yes to supporting people who are very close to you. And then you will find yourself in what I would call a de facto collaboration. If you were working on your calling, even if I've never met you and never shall, and I'm working on mine, then we are nonetheless collaborating on the same shared future. | |||
Your calling is similar to the Japanese term ‘ikigai’. You need to discover the overlap between your unique singular capacities, the moment that which is really most needful now, and your joy, your bliss, which most fully feeds your growing soul. | |||
==== Understand that Optimization is Game A ==== | |||
A metric to optimize around a finite set of metrics is ultimate at the end of the day to be complicated. In order to optimize, you actually artificially constrain the space of possibility. In fact, even the notion of optimization itself is something of a problem. We don't get to the kinds of solutions that we need by optimizing for any single metric, or even any finite set of metrics. | |||
==== Move to Non-Rivalry ==== | |||
The things that are necessary for humans to achieve fulfillment turned out to be the things that maximize our generation of non-rivalrous phenomenal. Non-rivalrous phenomena has an exponential growth rate and each time we get a level up, we dramatically increase our capacity. So we get this nice feedback loop that if we shift into increasingly non-rivalrous modes, then we get increasing escape velocity we were constantly rewarded for getting better and better at achieving fulfillment. | |||
==== Make Less Bad People and Provide Universal Love ==== | |||
It’s not really about making better people, it’s about making less shitty people. If we want to stop people from doing catastrophic damage, it is important that they feel love and are connected to others. | |||
==== Be in Right Relationship with Those Around You ==== | |||
Take care of your family and take care of your community. Also be in right relationship with nature. Learn how to connect with and remember the benefit of the natural environment. | |||
So, weave the fabric of culture at the level of direct relationality and the level of getting better and better at being a good friend and being a good partner and being a good parent or being a good child. | |||
Discernment in this particular sense is the ability to identify what is the relationship that is possible with another, so we can find out what is the highest possibility of the relationship. The right relationship is the practice of stepping into that and then enabling a future frontiers of that relationship. And then again, discerning what is available, and continue to go into that. | |||
==== Have Coherence with Others ==== | |||
Coherence means that my relationship with you is a relationship where I am endeavoring to support your becoming more sovereign. And you were endeavour to support my becoming more sovereign. That by directionality, begins to have more and more depth and richness to it. And so we begin to have agreements and begin to have communications protocols, we begin to have a history and a connectedness that allows us to do deeper and harder things with each other. At the same time, it allows us to get deeper into our own selves. | |||
==== Find the Truth ==== | |||
Find the truth because all perspectives on reality are going to be a reduction of reality. You are going to have blind spots that are unavoidable. The only way you start to address them is having more perspectives. | |||
So how do we have more perspectives? | |||
By having conversations. We think in groups in conversation with each other. Really learn the art of coming together in groups that can have these conversations. | |||
With who? | |||
By talking to people around you. No matter what the origin source is, if it is broadcast, it is broadly untrustworthy, which means that you can listen to it, but you're gonna have to do a lot of work to make any sense out of it at all. So in order for you to find out the truth, talk to the people around you because the best source of information is people you know. In other words, rather than trying to get information from new sources of people you don't know, you better off getting those information from people you know because you don't know the filter that that information is coming through. We make sense of things in the community of people that we know and trust. So to speak, it gives you a lot more information and not to mention, a lot more sense making capacity than receiving information from any anonymous source. So the kinds of things that we naturally do like hanging out with our friends and we have conversations, we should do that a lot more, and we do it a lot more deliberately. And then we do it with the kind of intention that is the specific intention of seeking insight and with greater depth and a greater dimensionality of perception than would otherwise be possible. | |||
Also, seek out the right people that have divergent views. Learning how to have productive conversations with others with different worldviews is a skill. | |||
How? | |||
Here are a couple of tips: | Here are a couple of tips: | ||
As Jordan Hall describes, a Game B environment | * Share what is yours to share | ||
* Follow Rule Omega - amplify the signal in what people are saying. After a few turns of speaking, the signal will be clearer. | |||
==== Create a Game B Environment ==== | |||
One of the primary things that a person will notice when they’re participating in this Game B environment is a radical upgrade and the meaningfulness of their lived experience. Their life will in fact be and feel more meaningful. | |||
As Jordan Hall describes, a Game B environment probably going to be more like 1,500 to 3,000 people. It’s somewhere in the range of a village to small town but it has all of it. It has kids being born, it has kids going to school, it has old people, it has people dying, it has food production, it has energy. For the moment, it will still need to interface with Game A, if only in an asymmetrical way. For example, goods are sold into Game A. | |||
Think of it as like Google village where the capacity to be able to generate high-value product into Game A is asymmetrically high, and so that produces the output that generates the influx of resources necessary to be able to get the things you can’t get out of the community but the community is constantly looking for ways to use its capacities and its relationship with the larger world to become increasingly local and increasingly autonomous. | |||
==== Develop the Meta Principles or Selecting Constraints ==== | |||
Forrest Laundry on designing Game B: “So thinking about design questions in a way that neither top down, which is maybe accurate, but not precise enough, or bottom up, which may be really, really precise, but takes a long time. We find ourselves in a situation where we need to come up with design capabilities, design characteristics that have the rapidity of top down, but the effectiveness of bottom up and so in a sense, our exercise is essentially to develop a set of tools to develop a set of conversations of intelligence building apparatus that allows us to deal with complexity in a profoundly clear way.” | |||
==== Develop the meta-psychotechnologies ==== | |||
====Develop the meta-psychotechnologies==== | |||
Psychotechnologies may also play a role in opening up the cognitive spaces for new forms of perception and knowledge to emerge. | Psychotechnologies may also play a role in opening up the cognitive spaces for new forms of perception and knowledge to emerge. | ||
We should find the meta | We should find the meta design for psycho-technologies, to actually then come back down to the level of doing the psycho-technologies of Game B, which would be in principle now at this point distinct from the psycho-technologies of Game A. | ||
We can endeavor to curate the | We can endeavor to curate the psychotechnologies that are the most effective, and then recursively using them to bring groups together using these techniques to then give insight into what might be a deeper and better way of doing it. | ||
<references /> | |||
[[Category:Concepts]] | [[Category:Concepts]] |