See also Merton Thesis,Mertonian Norms (dont know if that ever inspired sci-fi?)
「Becker 1992」
Question: are the Mertonian norms fundamentally inhospitable to meritocracy, so that they may yet serve as a viable target for the transmogrification of socalled antiintellualism?
>the scientific ethos does not have [its] theoreticians… but it has [its] [designori]
What's the clash with meritocracy? Disinterest?
Interesting to see Mennos classified here as "radical pietists" when I normally read of them as being "fancy anabaptists", where fancy is the opposite of radical in that it's a pejorative for an overly conformational* relation with the world.
FWIW, I've run across a "protestant ethic" ascribed also to the Starovery (russian "old believers"); my current explanation is that whenever a marginal group finds the traditional low-risk cursus closed (whether due to exclusion by the external majority, or to disapproval by their in-group) they tend to reinvest in speculative ventures (and as long as they're doing so jointly, they ought to have sufficient diversification to thrive under this allocation?).
EDIT: a deeper Q from Pietism: to what extent must an organisation behave in ways that are comprehensible to its rank and file? (1984 argues that it's important enough that comprehensibility should override consistency?)
EDIT2: * in order to get "in the world" vs "of the world", we possibly need english prepositions, and definitely need to read John classically, as if the world is clopen and therefore not out of the world equivales in the world. What about the boundary of the world? (yet another open question for Algebraic Theology)
Yes. And communism — esp. the secrecy aspect, in relation to YC/SIGINT.. “waste is inevitable but rivalry is optional” {waste->pleasure,rivalry->reward} in same snowclone, so… universalism, too. And organized skepticism (like those paradoxical games where victory is uncorrelated with effort,motivation,or intent; Simplicitas’ dual, sprezzatura misses the point)
Wont be surprised if Nikolai Feodorovich turns out to have been a crypto-raskolnik all along
>Fyodorov opposed the idea of property of books and ideas and never published anything during his lifetime.
Right. Pietists would not be classified as weird in the Rao taxonomy, so radical pietists sounds just like hypernormal. So who indeed are the proweird antimeritocrats? Practical (entheogenic,texting) sufi-taoists? Such that friendly neighborhood incomprehensibility is very much an organization feature?
Having been engaged by a nearby village to present his philosophy over a three-day series of lectures, Nasruddin started on the first day:
— O Villagers, do you know what I'm about to tell you?
— No, Mullah, we do not!
— Well, I'm certainly not going to waste my time lecturing the ignorant!
and he promptly left on his donkey.
On the second day:
— O Villagers, do you know what I'm about to tell you?
— Yes, Mullah, we do!
— Well, I'm certainly not going to waste my time belabouring the obvious!
and he promptly left on his donkey.
On the third day, the villagers (having stayed up late in conference the night before crafting their strategy) were more excited than ever to hear Nasruddin speak:
— O Villagers, do you know what I'm about to tell you?
— Some of us, Mullah, know, and some do not!
— Excellent! Let those who know instruct those who do not.
and he promptly left on his donkey.
EDIT: "I must grow my granfalloon" says the one who, looking at their pocketwatch, dangles total comp, but the great one attracts (as t->oo) a karass with but a bare hook?
https://archive.org/download/Demian_201305/Demian_text.pdf
“How TM met HKH” backstory summarized for the proles here by yet another Nasr- https://archive.is/3JwSV
So the man called HKH a [Sith?] princebishop there? (No need to find the german edition as TM targeted an american audience)
“Ctrl-f River” will also direct you to the essential bits ;)
And the MCP said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy ⊓-er? And he said, I know not: Am I my meter's keeper? http://cap-lore.com/CapTheory/upenn/Gnosis/Gnosis.html