
Developing ethical, social, and cognitive competence (2015) - networked
https://vividness.live/2015/10/12/developing-ethical-social-and-cognitive-competence/
======
nibs
I love this subject. For those who read it, the stage 4.5 that many gifted
people (and rarely others) end up going through is also called existential
depression [1]. It involves coming to terms with the first principals of the
universe and their lack of implicit meaning. If you choose not to believe in
free will, you end up as a nihilist.

If you choose however to embrace the lack of meaning our society and exert
free will, you usually end up working to improve the silent meta-systems that
dictate the quality of life of people and the interactions they have with each
other in life. And that becomes the source of meaning - creating or editing
these meta-systems on purpose in a way that serves society.

[1]: [http://www.davidsongifted.org/Search-
Database/entry/A10554](http://www.davidsongifted.org/Search-
Database/entry/A10554)

------
peterhartree
> Fluidity recognizes that ethics can have no ultimate foundation, but that we
> can still often make clear judgements. [...] It takes ethics to be a matter
> of collaborative practical improvisation that is responsive to specific
> situations. Lacking any ultimate principles, an engineering approach to
> ethical mastery is impossible, but ethical skill—a toolkit of methods for
> ethical bricolage—can be learned.

If you find this interesting, I recommend _Ethics Without Principles_ by
Jonathan Dancy [1], or the Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy article on Moral
Particularism [2].

[1]
[http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0199270023.001...](http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0199270023.001.0001/acprof-9780199270026)

[2] [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-
particularism/](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-particularism/)

------
slindz
This article just made my Sunday. It was a great 25m read on cognitive
development stages. It definitely wrapped up a lot of loose thoughts I'd had
on the subject.

Would be very interesting to hear where HN'ers place themselves. I suspect the
estimated 5% of the population that reaches Stage 5 would be well represented
here.

*edit - needed coffee, wording.

------
forthefuture
Maybe I'm just an undeveloped child, but after 2 all of the "improvements"
just seem like an outgoing person explaining why they're the evolution of
humanity.

------
pavlov
Interesting. Would the following simplification be a complete mangling of the
author's intent:

Donald Trump is a stage 2 adult who has constructed a message that strongly
appeals to certain stage 3 people. He has done this not by actually sharing
the group empathy typical of stage 3, but rather by using a media feedback
cycle to optimize his message for a certain local maximum.

Hillary Clinton is a stage 5 adult who has trouble connecting with both stage
3 and 4 voters. Her lack of fixed values and fluid meta-systematic approach
comes off as greed and manipulative self-interest -- and for good reason,
because the stage 5 level of operation is so difficult to judge for most
people.

Sanders would have been an appealing stage 3 candidate in this race.

