Table of contents from the part of the Eggplant book explaining why rationalism can’t work. As you can see, I was only able to complete it by including a lot of whimsical examples to amuse myself.pic.twitter.com/4Wq20swOJK
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
(Not sure I’m understanding your question, but:) The stages model is a claim of an invariant sequence: you can’t do n+1 until you’ve done n. It doesn’t (in itself) address individual differences wrt difficulty of stages.
No what I mean is that I, and apparently many others, don't exactly have the experience of mastering 3 and then going towards 4. 3 seems pretty alien to me, and 2-4 feels more true. That suggests a problem with the model or that I'm not understanding it.
It’s possible to misunderstand 3 as “social skills”; one of the points of The Cofounders was that 4 and 5 are *also* about social skills, potentially at much more sophisticated levels.
There *is* a pretty big literature on that, though (i.e. factors that make it more or less likely someone will progress through the stages). I find it tedious & it doesn’t look like good science to me, so I haven’t read a lot, but I can point you at review articles if interested
I think there's a larger variety of self-readings than in Kegan, and no invarient seq. "5" is roughly values/heuristics/methods; "4", roughly goals/obedience/norms; "3", feelings... but some aesthetes read themselves in terms of tastes and this isn't on Kegan, etc
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.