Someone at level 1 is going to take longer to learn how to get along in a level 3 or 4 environment than a level 3 or 4 player, but is capable of knowing about them, while people who are level 3⁄4 players at core can’t really know about anything. They can acquire know-how by doing, but not know-about, insofar as their language is nonepistemic.
I don’t think that squares with the subject/object interpretation you’re offering here though. If I can take level one as object, I can use and manipulate and know in all the ways that someone who is subject to it can.
It seems to me that one can take each level as subject or object, without necessarily having taken the previously level as subject/object. That might mean that the “stages of subject/object shifts” you’re pointing at here is less useful.
I know people who can’t really grok other people playing in social realms, but are really good at sensemaking with other people who can take level one as object.
I also know people can play social games a bunch, but are bad at object level knowing.
I also know people who understand level 4 game playing through a level one lens, viewing at as another aspect of the territory.
And I know people who understand level 1 lens, but basically use it to manipulate level 4 social reality to get their way, rather than seeing at as the thing that’s important in its’ own right.
Someone at level 1 is going to take longer to learn how to get along in a level 3 or 4 environment than a level 3 or 4 player, but is capable of knowing about them, while people who are level 3⁄4 players at core can’t really know about anything. They can acquire know-how by doing, but not know-about, insofar as their language is nonepistemic.
I don’t think that squares with the subject/object interpretation you’re offering here though. If I can take level one as object, I can use and manipulate and know in all the ways that someone who is subject to it can.
It seems to me that one can take each level as subject or object, without necessarily having taken the previously level as subject/object. That might mean that the “stages of subject/object shifts” you’re pointing at here is less useful.
I know people who can’t really grok other people playing in social realms, but are really good at sensemaking with other people who can take level one as object.
I also know people can play social games a bunch, but are bad at object level knowing.
I also know people who understand level 4 game playing through a level one lens, viewing at as another aspect of the territory.
And I know people who understand level 1 lens, but basically use it to manipulate level 4 social reality to get their way, rather than seeing at as the thing that’s important in its’ own right.
So a stab at a model that can handle more complexity might be two factors of:
What levels you can take as object.
What levels do you most frequently use as your primary sensemaking apparatus.