The reason to try a new approach to things is because you have demonstrated proof that existing approaches are not working.

let's unpack:

1. what counts as proof?

2. what counts as failure?

3. not working for whom?

4. not working towards what end?

what counts as proof? and what counts as failure?

in order to answer this one needs to understand a thing well enough to know what success looks like and to know what failure modes exist.
A thing can fail by succumbing to a known failure mode, or failing in a new way. New failure modes commonly emerge from new contexts. Or they may be due to new developments in an existing context.
proof of failure means you have observed (rather than concluded via hearsay or via abstract reasoning) failure in a known mode or new mode. in order to obtain this proof, a relatively close distance or even insider perspective is usually necessary.
failure modes are specific to the thing being examined but there are some very common patterns. here's a couple of the most common patterns:
- social breakdown in the authoritarian direction. this leads to physical and mental abuse by those in power towards subordinates.
- social breakdown in the anarchist direction. this leads to dissolution of functioning relationships and unchecked all-against-all power struggles.
- systematic breakdown in the direction of incoherence. view and belief losing touch with the principle and function of practice. cargo-culting. magical thinking.
- systematic breakdown in the direction of ossification. inability to adapt existing systems to changing conditions. excess focus placed on tradition and institutional sanction, to the detriment of the functionality of the system.
not working for whom?

the most relevant group, obviously, are people currently involved in working in/on/with/through (prepositions lol) the thing.

also relevant however are people who might become directly involved in the future. the over-the-horizon growth potential.
but there's a special group that I want to identify as the most relevant here. the group of people who are currently attempting to become involved or are involved and in the process of becoming uninvolved (probably due to a social or systematic failure). the liminal cases.
the liminal cases are the most relevant cases because they represent the living edge of the thing. this is where most of the action is taking place. what direction a thing goes in in the future is largely determined by what's happening at the margins in the present.
not working towards what end?

this is part of the necessary context. systems are a means to an end. if the system either cannot clearly define its ends, or defines unobtainable ends, it is incoherent.
each system defines its means and ends differently. once again, the importance of having a sufficiently close-range perspective really stands out here. in order to understand the principle and function of a thing, and what it's methods and expected results are, requires proximity
in order to determine if a system works according to its own stated goals, one has to understand those goals in detail, and be in a position to evaluate results. this requires discernment and experience. it also requires a level of detachment from the blinders of identity.

More from Life

“We don’t negotiate salaries” is a negotiation tactic.

Always. No, your company is not an exception.

A tactic I don’t appreciate at all because of how unfairly it penalizes low-leverage, junior employees, and those loyal enough not to question it, but that’s negotiation for you after all. Weaponized information asymmetry.

Listen to Aditya


And by the way, you should never be worried that an offer would be withdrawn if you politely negotiate.

I have seen this happen *extremely* rarely, mostly to women, and anyway is a giant red flag. It suggests you probably didn’t want to work there.

You wish there was no negotiating so it would all be more fair? I feel you, but it’s not happening.

Instead, negotiate hard, use your privilege, and then go and share numbers with your underrepresented and underpaid colleagues. […]
TW: suicidal ideation.

At the darkest days of the abuse I was being subjected to I decided to attend a conference for women in Los Angeles. I convinced my mother in law to pay for it because I couldn’t afford it. @ChristineCaine was preaching. I was desperate...
1/


I wanted to die, I didn’t see a way out and I had tried everything. I imagined many ways to die daily. The most recurring one was throwing my car down a bridge I had to drive over every day. I never did it because my kids were in the car and I was afraid one of them would...

2/

survive or I’d kill someone on the way down.

Christine spoke about honoring your pastors even when they weren’t great, she spoke of us expecting too much of pastors and how wrong that was. She said God would use our testimony if we submitted to our pastors.

3/

She said “honor your pastors, God will honor you.” She said more about having disagreed with her pastors but she submitted and God honored her and now she’s blessed. How if they are faithfully serving God, we need to support them and not forfeit what God has for us.

4/

I felt my heart drop into my stomach. I got up and went to the bathroom because I couldn’t breath and I felt like I was going to faint if I didn’t scream. I now know I was having a panic attack. I sat on the toilet w/my head between my legs, breathed and wept..
5/

You May Also Like

Ivor Cummins has been wrong (or lying) almost entirely throughout this pandemic and got paid handsomly for it.

He has been wrong (or lying) so often that it will be nearly impossible for me to track every grift, lie, deceit, manipulation he has pulled. I will use...


... other sources who have been trying to shine on light on this grifter (as I have tried to do, time and again:


Example #1: "Still not seeing Sweden signal versus Denmark really"... There it was (Images attached).
19 to 80 is an over 300% difference.

Tweet: https://t.co/36FnYnsRT9


Example #2 - "Yes, I'm comparing the Noridcs / No, you cannot compare the Nordics."

I wonder why...

Tweets: https://t.co/XLfoX4rpck / https://t.co/vjE1ctLU5x


Example #3 - "I'm only looking at what makes the data fit in my favour" a.k.a moving the goalposts.

Tweets: https://t.co/vcDpTu3qyj / https://t.co/CA3N6hC2Lq