When I talk about “model-building skill” I think I mean three separate skills:
Skill A) Model-building skill proper
Skill B) Introspection skill
Skill C) Communication skill
There are probably a lot of people who are decent at model-building proper. (Situation #1)
I’m imagining genius-level programmers. But then when you try to get some insight into what their models actually are or why they do things one way vs another, it’s opaque. They don’t know how to explicate any of it. They get annoyed by having to try to verbalize their models or even know what they are—they’d rather get back to coding and are frustrated having to “waste time” convincing other people.
Then there are other people who might be decent at model-building and introspecting on their models, but when they try to communicate their models to you, it comes out as gibberish (at least to your ears). And asking them questions doesn’t seem to go anywhere. (Situation #2)
Then there’s the situation where people are really articulate and able to communicate very clear, explicit, verbal models—but when it comes to implementing those models on a somatic-emotional level, they run into trouble. But it sounds like they have the model-building skill because they can talk about their models and share genuine insights about them. (Situation #3)
An example is having a bunch of insightful theories about social dynamics, but when actually in a situation where they could put those theories into practice, there is some kind of block. The models are not acting like felt models.
...
I’ve been in Situation #3 and Situation #1 before.
Overcoming Situation #3 is a scary thing. Being able to see, make sense of, and articulate models (from afar) was a way of distancing myself from reality. It was a preemptive defense mechanism. It helped me feel superior / knowledgable / satisfied. And then I continued to sit and watch rather than participate, engage, run experiments, etc. Or I’d play with “toy models” like games or structured activities or imaginings or simulations.
To be fair to toy models, I learned quite a lot / built many useful models from playing games, so I don’t regret doing a lot of that. And, there’s also a lot to be gained from trial by fire, so to speak.
For Situation #1, the solution mostly came from learning to introspect properly and also learning to take myself seriously.
Once I honestly felt like I had meaningful things to share with other people, it became easier to bother trying. (It’s hard to do this if you’re surrounded by people who have high standards for “interesting” or “useful.” Being around people who were more appreciative helped me overcome some stuck beliefs around my personal worth.)
I also had a block around “convincing other people of anything.” So while I could voice models, I couldn’t use them to “convince people” to change anything about their lives or way of being. It made me a worse teacher and also meant my models always came across as “nice/cool but irrelevant.” And not in a way that was easy for anyone to detect properly, especially myself.
Is situation 3 more about introspection, or more generally about internal alignment? (It seems like introspection is necessary but not sufficient for that)
I would classify situation 3 as a lack of the model-building skill proper, which includes having my models affect me on an alief level. Although introspection would help me notice what my aliefs are to begin with.
An example is having a bunch of insightful theories about social dynamics, but when actually in a situation where they could put those theories into practice, there is some kind of block. The models are not acting like felt models.
I think i’ve lived this one before as well!! (i mean… everyone has, maybe, either on a large scale or small.)
I have a X-ian example i want to share, but I don’t want to be seen as a pushy person “trying to convert people.” (I do think it’s an interesting and useful example though, and actually not-uncritical of Christianity, at least as practiced, anyway.)
I also had a block around “convincing other people of anything.”
Aughhh, yes. That rings true!
What I ended up doing that gave me a big breakthrough was HAMMER the person repeatedly; whenever the other person (for example, my aspie husband) was like “this is wrong because of X” and they hadn’t accounted something, I could be like “No, I don’t think so because of Y.” (or, funnier, “Actually, I think it MIGHT be wrong because of X, but I want to make sure you know about Y, because I think you don’t.”)
Also remain very ready to turn around, and not be afraid of people’s threats of anger. (This required extensive community formation to get to… and I may not even be there yet, but standing up and opening my mouth—at the RIGHT MOMENT in the right way—seemed good.)
The tension of always being meek and ready to pivot to genuinely caring about your interlocutor’s (claimed) emotions when they say (or signal) they’re sincerly upset b/c of something you said... ...and also to say in my heart, (for a hypothetical example if it’s some woman I’m quarreling with), “this person said she was truth-seeking; I am going to loop back to her about how 1 thing might not have been accounted with her evidence. Even if it’s unnecessary for the plan going forward, even it it’ll look like nitpicking—it’ll build her trust of me in the future if she’s genuinely liking truth more than her own comfortableness.”
When I talk about “model-building skill” I think I mean three separate skills:
Skill A) Model-building skill proper
Skill B) Introspection skill
Skill C) Communication skill
There are probably a lot of people who are decent at model-building proper. (Situation #1)
I’m imagining genius-level programmers. But then when you try to get some insight into what their models actually are or why they do things one way vs another, it’s opaque. They don’t know how to explicate any of it. They get annoyed by having to try to verbalize their models or even know what they are—they’d rather get back to coding and are frustrated having to “waste time” convincing other people.
Then there are other people who might be decent at model-building and introspecting on their models, but when they try to communicate their models to you, it comes out as gibberish (at least to your ears). And asking them questions doesn’t seem to go anywhere. (Situation #2)
Then there’s the situation where people are really articulate and able to communicate very clear, explicit, verbal models—but when it comes to implementing those models on a somatic-emotional level, they run into trouble. But it sounds like they have the model-building skill because they can talk about their models and share genuine insights about them. (Situation #3)
An example is having a bunch of insightful theories about social dynamics, but when actually in a situation where they could put those theories into practice, there is some kind of block. The models are not acting like felt models.
...
I’ve been in Situation #3 and Situation #1 before.
Overcoming Situation #3 is a scary thing. Being able to see, make sense of, and articulate models (from afar) was a way of distancing myself from reality. It was a preemptive defense mechanism. It helped me feel superior / knowledgable / satisfied. And then I continued to sit and watch rather than participate, engage, run experiments, etc. Or I’d play with “toy models” like games or structured activities or imaginings or simulations.
To be fair to toy models, I learned quite a lot / built many useful models from playing games, so I don’t regret doing a lot of that. And, there’s also a lot to be gained from trial by fire, so to speak.
For Situation #1, the solution mostly came from learning to introspect properly and also learning to take myself seriously.
Once I honestly felt like I had meaningful things to share with other people, it became easier to bother trying. (It’s hard to do this if you’re surrounded by people who have high standards for “interesting” or “useful.” Being around people who were more appreciative helped me overcome some stuck beliefs around my personal worth.)
I also had a block around “convincing other people of anything.” So while I could voice models, I couldn’t use them to “convince people” to change anything about their lives or way of being. It made me a worse teacher and also meant my models always came across as “nice/cool but irrelevant.” And not in a way that was easy for anyone to detect properly, especially myself.
Is situation 3 more about introspection, or more generally about internal alignment? (It seems like introspection is necessary but not sufficient for that)
Yeah, I think it’s more the latter.
I would classify situation 3 as a lack of the model-building skill proper, which includes having my models affect me on an alief level. Although introspection would help me notice what my aliefs are to begin with.
I think i’ve lived this one before as well!! (i mean… everyone has, maybe, either on a large scale or small.)
I have a X-ian example i want to share, but I don’t want to be seen as a pushy person “trying to convert people.” (I do think it’s an interesting and useful example though, and actually not-uncritical of Christianity, at least as practiced, anyway.)
Aughhh, yes. That rings true!
What I ended up doing that gave me a big breakthrough was HAMMER the person repeatedly; whenever the other person (for example, my aspie husband) was like “this is wrong because of X” and they hadn’t accounted something, I could be like “No, I don’t think so because of Y.”
(or, funnier, “Actually, I think it MIGHT be wrong because of X, but I want to make sure you know about Y, because I think you don’t.”)
Also remain very ready to turn around, and not be afraid of people’s threats of anger. (This required extensive community formation to get to… and I may not even be there yet, but standing up and opening my mouth—at the RIGHT MOMENT in the right way—seemed good.)
The tension of always being meek and ready to pivot to genuinely caring about your interlocutor’s (claimed) emotions when they say (or signal) they’re sincerly upset b/c of something you said...
...and also to say in my heart, (for a hypothetical example if it’s some woman I’m quarreling with), “this person said she was truth-seeking; I am going to loop back to her about how 1 thing might not have been accounted with her evidence. Even if it’s unnecessary for the plan going forward, even it it’ll look like nitpicking—it’ll build her trust of me in the future if she’s genuinely liking truth more than her own comfortableness.”