no pressure, but any thoughts on the palladium crowd's great founder theory stuff?
They also have this Thiel/Strauss idea that most good socioeconomic niches and effective ways of operating with influential people are kind of hidden.
Conversation
Replying to
I like parts of model (especially the live player/dead player model) but overall I am definitely an anti-Straussian and have a default hostility to all things Thiel, so I tend to stay away from anything within 2 degrees of Thielverse core institutionally.
1
1
12
Makes sense, I also found that helpful
(To be clear, the Thiel/Strauss comparison is mine, not his!
they just emphasize that you might have to be kind of clever to fight your way to an effective understanding of the world)
Many thanks for your thoughts 😎
2
2
Well, he writes for Palladium, and there is a fairly obvious and legible connection between Straussian-Girardian thought and his ideas, so not exactly all in your head.
2
5
There are significant differences in my thinking from Strauss-Girad strand as well. Notably my anthropology is different and I don't think mimesis is basis of human desire or rivalry. I also denounce the noble lie.
1
1
13
(There are some subtler differences between say me and Palladium, but they generally are a great mag, and easy to work with, they like to publish theory)
1
4
(Most magazines don't like theory. I tried pitching the already finished Göbekli Tepe piece at many other outlets, and uniformly the editors wrote back glowing reviews but said this isn't quite right for them.)
2
10
Ah good! You're probably aware though that publishing on Palladium means the optics are already loaded in a certain direction.
One reason I don't publishing outside my own channels except very rarely is I don't like associations I don't actively choose.


