The stuff I write about meta-rationality seems to appeal most to people who are ~28: having worked through the limits of rationalism, with the more complex alternative coming into view on the horizon.
-
Show this thread
-
Why this discrepancy? I can think of quite a few possibilities. However, it’s hard to know, because: As far as I can determine, Kegan and his collaborators have never published their empirical work, much less made data available.
2 replies 0 retweets 24 likesShow this thread -
Their citation chains always eventually root in their SOI Guide, which just has some summary statistics in an appendix. This is a self-published book. Nothing has been peer reviewed. It was written in 1988, and kept private until self-publication in 2011 https://www.amazon.com/dp/1461128803/?tag=meaningness-20 …
3 replies 0 retweets 19 likesShow this thread -
Possible there’s been no serious data collection since the mid-80s, and Kegan’s “not before 40” assertion rests on that single old study. Results might be different 35 years later. Also I see meta-rationality showing up at ~28 in STEM geeks, who were not in his sample afaik.
3 replies 0 retweets 27 likesShow this thread -
Alternatively, it’s plausible that Kegan &co’s instrument measures something different than other developmental theorists’. They emphasize emotional and relational complexity, where others emphasize reasoning complexity, although both include both and see them as linked.
2 replies 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
It’s a common observation that STEM geeks develop cognitive skills fast and lag in emotional & relational skills. Developing in different domains at different rates is called “décallage” (lag) in the literature. Kegan seems less willing to acknowledge décallage than some others.
6 replies 2 retweets 26 likesShow this thread -
Maybe you really can’t be emotionally and relationally meta-systematic before age 40, although you can develop meta-rationality over a few years starting mid/late 20s. (Research suggests developing cognitive meta-systematicity (= meta-rationality) takes 6-10 years to complete.)
6 replies 0 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @Meaningness
Yes, you've basically got the picture. The SOI pulls for emotional and relational content. Therefore, it's not simply about cognition, which can indeed show up in one's 20s. The way to think about it: There is a difference between applying cognition to outer objects...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MarkDForman @Meaningness
...versus applying that cognition to one's self and its various aspects. The more emotional the content, the stronger the regressive pull. So it takes more time develop steady meta-cognition where the "I" is the focal point.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MarkDForman @Meaningness
It's usually 35-40 or older, a PhD or some informal equivalent or expertise, managerial or mentoring experience of some kind, long-term relationships, usually with kids, and a history of intentional self-growth. This would be a rough, average picture of a Stage 5/Strategist.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Thanks! Resonates with my take on this:https://meaningness.com/cofounders-in-relationship …
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.