The third class of norms is, of course, those that are wholly unknown to both the individuals following them and the ones breaking them - the ones nobody notices if you don't follow and will never quite understand what they even are if you point them out.
Enjoyable essay. I share your _Revolt of the Public_-ish concern about how psyops are now mass-distributed by schizo entrepreneurs, rather than broadcast centrally by the likes of Bernays (though let's not overblow this, most likely stuff like Kony was an op, there is more and more fine-tuning of the algorithms, and we've proceeded from the open internet old-timers like us grew up with to a bunch of walled gardens curated at the limit by corporatist deep state friendly "content boards").
As for norms, I think I see what you are getting at, but think your insistence on refusing to address the object level impairs your essay. For example, I don't see the distinction you draw between Olympian and Chthonic norms as being well-drawn. I'm not sure there is a hard distinction to begin with. That aside, Chthonic norms surely precede and undergird Olympian norms, since one needs pragmatics and a "form of life" to use language, and since habit and cultural evolution precede formal reason. And Chthonic norms, contrary to your assertion, must have reason to them or they won't be norms, and they won't propagate -- even if the reason is just "we all drive on an arbitrary side to avoid a game of chicken." Nor are there hard distinctions in social opprobrium or consequence between the two -- for example, Olympian norms can lead to death by violation of legal code though not social opprobrium, though as a practical matter the social code will follow the de facto law (in the pragmatic sense that people are legalists qua behaviorist, since they impound info on likely punishments as punishments are observed).
(Also, while I appreciate the TS Eliot Cats reference, alluding to a third, secret and mysterious class of norms obscures rather than illumines, & I'm ill-inclined to puzzle it out given the first two categories are, imo, ill-drawn.)
If you named a couple of concrete examples of each class of norm, these issues would be avoided; if that would entail engaging at the object level and groping free from the misty haze of meta-cognition, perhaps such is required to write a compelling essay.
All that said, enjoyable essay, great topic, looking forward to further essays as you shake off the peculiar cast of mind induced by Twitter.
PS: To the extent this essay was meant to obliquely comment on the Roko situation, I think it's worth pointing out that the people dog-piling on him are just as vicious as he is, they just think they have an acceptable target now since he crossed some threshold that makes it okay to, e.g., QT and call him a psychopath. That behavior disgusts me.
I wonder how this overlaps with archimedean/non-archimedean. Could make some dumb quadrants out of it. I think that Chthonic norms would tend towards the archimedean, while Olympian norms would tend towards the non-archimedean. It is nearly 2 AM, and I shall not elaborate at this time.
The third class of norms is, of course, those that are wholly unknown to both the individuals following them and the ones breaking them - the ones nobody notices if you don't follow and will never quite understand what they even are if you point them out.
Totally embodied illegibility, in memeplex form.
Enjoyable essay. I share your _Revolt of the Public_-ish concern about how psyops are now mass-distributed by schizo entrepreneurs, rather than broadcast centrally by the likes of Bernays (though let's not overblow this, most likely stuff like Kony was an op, there is more and more fine-tuning of the algorithms, and we've proceeded from the open internet old-timers like us grew up with to a bunch of walled gardens curated at the limit by corporatist deep state friendly "content boards").
As for norms, I think I see what you are getting at, but think your insistence on refusing to address the object level impairs your essay. For example, I don't see the distinction you draw between Olympian and Chthonic norms as being well-drawn. I'm not sure there is a hard distinction to begin with. That aside, Chthonic norms surely precede and undergird Olympian norms, since one needs pragmatics and a "form of life" to use language, and since habit and cultural evolution precede formal reason. And Chthonic norms, contrary to your assertion, must have reason to them or they won't be norms, and they won't propagate -- even if the reason is just "we all drive on an arbitrary side to avoid a game of chicken." Nor are there hard distinctions in social opprobrium or consequence between the two -- for example, Olympian norms can lead to death by violation of legal code though not social opprobrium, though as a practical matter the social code will follow the de facto law (in the pragmatic sense that people are legalists qua behaviorist, since they impound info on likely punishments as punishments are observed).
(Also, while I appreciate the TS Eliot Cats reference, alluding to a third, secret and mysterious class of norms obscures rather than illumines, & I'm ill-inclined to puzzle it out given the first two categories are, imo, ill-drawn.)
If you named a couple of concrete examples of each class of norm, these issues would be avoided; if that would entail engaging at the object level and groping free from the misty haze of meta-cognition, perhaps such is required to write a compelling essay.
All that said, enjoyable essay, great topic, looking forward to further essays as you shake off the peculiar cast of mind induced by Twitter.
PS: To the extent this essay was meant to obliquely comment on the Roko situation, I think it's worth pointing out that the people dog-piling on him are just as vicious as he is, they just think they have an acceptable target now since he crossed some threshold that makes it okay to, e.g., QT and call him a psychopath. That behavior disgusts me.
I wonder how this overlaps with archimedean/non-archimedean. Could make some dumb quadrants out of it. I think that Chthonic norms would tend towards the archimedean, while Olympian norms would tend towards the non-archimedean. It is nearly 2 AM, and I shall not elaborate at this time.
A very interesting mishmash of ideas for contemplation