Two meta-problems that should inform learning and evaluation
Two meta-problems that should inform learning and evaluation
I recently listened to a quite thought-provoking talk titled "Solving the Meaning Crisis." The speaker, John Vervaeke, is an award-winning professor of psychology, cognitive science, and Buddhist psychology at the University of Toronto.
The talk covered many aspects of the so-called "meaning crisis," but one particular segment stood out to me: Vervaeke's discussion on two meta-problems we must solve to become adaptive and generally intelligent beings. It struck me that these meta-problems are not just relevant at the individual level but are also crucial for organisations striving to be adaptive and intelligent. Furthermore, learning and evaluation within organisations can play a pivotal role in addressing these meta-problems. But what are these meta-problems? According to Vervaeke:
The one is, I need to anticipate the world. The farther out I can anticipate the world, in fact, you do this intuitively, the more intelligence you will attribute to an entity. The more clearly reactive it is, the less intelligent. You've got the intuitive sense, which is largely correct, that the farther out you can anticipate, the better. (...) We can predictively prepare for the world.
The other, and these two are interlocked, is (...) relevance realisation. (...) There's way too much information to pay attention to. There's way too much information in your long-term memory and all the possible combinations. It's combinatorially explosive. (...) So what you have to do, it sounds like a Zen Cohen, you're intelligent by ignoring, overwhelmingly, most of the information, and you zero in on the relevant information.
Reflecting on these ideas, I wonder if the purpose of strategic learning and evaluation is to support teams and organisations in better anticipating the environments in which they operate and helping them identify the most relevant data. This, in turn, would enable them to improve their anticipatory capabilities. What would this mean for our approach to strategic learning and evaluation? Currently, I don't think we are great in either aspect.
Strategic learning and evaluation should aim to enhance an organisation's ability to anticipate and respond to changes by focusing on relevant information and continuously adapting to new insights. This approach aligns with the principles of systemic change and adaptive management, ultimately leading to more intelligent and resilient organisations.
I am curious to hear your thoughts on these ideas. How can we better integrate these meta-problems into our learning and evaluation frameworks to foster more adaptive and intelligent organisations? Or am I really just stating the obvious here?
Reference: From Philosophy For Our Times: Summertime Soul Search PART 1: John VERVAEKE 'Solving the meaning crisis', 6 Aug 2024. https://iai.tv/video/solving-the-meaning-crisis-john-vervaeke [accessed 07.08.2024]
The Paper Museum
Here is more from the talk of John Vervaeke, namely the four dimensions of meaningful life:
So what are the four dimensions of meaning in life? Just think about these quickly. Purpose, which is our culture tries to identify meaning in life with purpose. Purpose is only one of four dimensions. It's not the most important. There's the idea of an over-arching goal. Coherence, that's that nomological structure. Things have to make sense for you. Significance, you have to be connected to something that's really real. And the one that's most important, mattering, connectedness. This is how you determine if you have mattering, which I think is the core of meaning in life. In fact, I think the other three point to the fourth, mattering.
Ask yourself these two questions. What do I want to exist even if I don't? And how much of a difference do I make to it? If you got good answers to both of those, you have meaning in life. If you have only the first but not the second, you're seeking. You have neither, you're in trouble.
Why have I added this to my paper museum? I guess my post would not be complete with this little excerpt from the talk. As the talk was about the meaning crisis, these are the four dimensions Vervaeke proposes are needed for a meaningful life: purpose, coherence, significance, and connectedness.
This list reminded me of another list that Iain McGilchrist had shared, which I posted earlier. He identified three things that are most important for human fulfilment: meaning, connection to nature, and spirituality. Meaning, the thing Vervaekes's four things point to, is only one of the three things. Something to sit with ...
References: From Philosophy For Our Times: Summertime Soul Search PART 1: John VERVAEKE 'Solving the meaning crisis', 6 Aug 2024
Photo
A rainbow over the river Rhine, photographed from the three-country-bridge near Basel