supports and underpins this view with his own experience & example.
I think I agree with both of those things, as stated.
Conversation
What I'm struggling with here, is that it seems especially hard not just to get people to abandon stories (bad, for reasons I'll touch on),-
1
1
- but that getting any traction at all in changing the thrust of those stories is nigh-impossible, even with empathy & opportunity.
1
Storytelling is inextricably linked with survival. Without a story to tell, people die. No meaning -> no reason to live.
No conflict there.
1
So we need stories and I'm not saying we should get rid of those, just so we're clear. I don't think that's desirable.
2
1
We use stories to get around the world, define ourselves against others, try to understand ourselves and countless more things, obviously.
1
1
The problem is some of these stories are poisonous, to ourselves, others or both.
E.g. "I'm all that matters," the story of a sociopath.
2
1
Let's return to heuristics. Stories are heuristical. They teach general truths at the cost of precision when applied to individual cases.
1
1
Heuristics are fucking awesome. Without them we wouldn't be much good at making decisions.
But they work over an array of situations.
1
1
When we try to use a heuristic to explain discrete situations instead of to steer habits & responses, they break down.
It's not their job.
1
1
Having a story about yourself, there's nothing more tempting than to explain -everything- with recourse to the story you're telling.
So that's fine, you can have your story about yourself.
You'll get a lot of stuff wrong, but you can at least make effective decisions.
1
But then, when the circumstances change, we sometimes hold on to the story past its usefulness. We cling to it, cleave to it, choke it.
1
1
Show replies