Incidentally I feel like this kind of Alcibiades character should have been the Peter Wiggins backstory: that he was a really gifted kid in a brainy family, a childhood without struggle messed up his prudence, and his conflicts with resentful people gave him a shit dynamic with most of humanity.
If this were the case, though, then the torturous treatment of Ender would be justified by his family history. And it's hard to see how Valentine works in this.
Oh and BTW having a lot of unearned confidence is pretty good for most socializing but there's a population that fucking hates it and will prize shoving you around a bit.
It's also really hard for me to relate to people who have grievances against institutions that are similar to schools. In my life school has just been a tree full of goodies and I've basically fed my myself by shaking the tree as much as I've wanted to. It's hard to see any other view when that's the condition that's shaped me. Just hang out under the goodie tree bro.
So far those two vices haven't collapsed into a single crisis (where I get fucked by lack of a life-skill while out-on-a-limb) buuuut each of them has separately caused crises so it's probably just a matter of time. I've got to start upskilling before I bring irrevocable disaster to the people around me. And I think I need an education on risk.
I think my weirdest characteristic comes from being really really successful at formal schooling in a family that held it as the main value. Because my experiences in education have almost exclusively been easy top-tier success, I entered adulthood with an air of effortless invincibility that has been both out-of-line with some practical life skills and has also led me to take big swing-for-the-fences risks in the course of finding my place in the world.
gat dangit
Now I have to learn about this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dempster%E2%80%93Shafer_theory
The jury had to kill Socrates because he mistakenly took democracy seriously. He thought that any individual would have to be accountable for the high domain of political rationalization. He thought any schlub in the agora should be able to give an account of truth, justice, nobility, and so on. He refused to route his questions through the appropriate social technologies that Athens' oligarchs had provided to diffuse this accountability: the priests, the mystery cults, etc.
Everyone who thinks s/he is an exemplary communicator is mistaken.
Communication is not an arrow and audiences are not a target. Communication is a reciprocal process that brings the behavior of multiple people into a sustainable flow.
The only way to be an exemplary communicator is to have some method for addressing millions of follow-up questions. People on the top address these questions through staff, technology, etc. People on the bottom address these questions face-to-face.
The first rule of Grievance Club is Who said you get to make the rules without checking with me? That is SO typical of you -- I bet you don't even think about NORMAL people like ME. If anything, *I* should be telling *you* what the rules are. Except they wouldn't be rules. Actually if I were making the rules of Grievance Club they'd be completely chill guidelines or suggestions and if people like you applied them wrong or even if you tried to understand them as rules I'd have you shot.
You think the politicians are in charge? You look at this and you tell me we're not being punished?
Humanist interested in the consequences of the machine on intellectual history.