Waldemar,
Thanks for this!
I took a quick crack at diagramming this, included below.
The simplest way I know to plot something in 4 dimension is to use 2 2-dimensional plots.
So the chart includes below represent the 2 additional dimensions you suggested. Combined with the previous chart each approach is plotted in 4 dimensions.

I used simple labels for each pole. “Embrace Reality” is intended to represent your “Epistemology serves ontology”
(I claim the “reality is our common ground”, I “seek real good” and I have declared my ontology. See: What there is<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Beyond-5FTheism_What-5Fthere-5Fis&d=DwIGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=qeWXcTM8V3n1uV-ugfm3rdIho8BSfc36wMQJxhYS_j4&s=RV7vd5OLswTf6YS14fK3Dc5vH9uLQzJmLbB1YbLUld4&e= > )

The “Unconstrained (self-serving) Narrative” pole represents your  Epistemology serves Epistemology pole.
( considered several labels for this, such as “Alternative Facts”, “Fantasy”, and “Only I know the Truth”).

My understanding of the time dimension you suggest is not the passage of time, but the stability of the advocated approach as it has shifted over time.
I indicate this by “Temporally stable” and “Temporally Unstable”.

Is this close to what you had in mind?
Is the 2 chars = 4 dimension approach sound?
Are the labels of the poles clear linguistically, semantically, and dimensionally?
Are the worldviews well-placed?

Thanks!

Lee Beaumont





On Dec 6, 2021, at 6:25 PM, Waldemar Schmidt <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________


Lee:

 Your “Plotting Our Future” bi-dimensional” portrayal surely is thought provoking.

Knowing the various “paths” proposed to transcend the digital identity crisis (or portions thereof) is a challenge.


For your consideration, I propose the possibility of a couple of additions.

In particular:

  *    Adding a third dimension - ie, a z axis.
  *   Adding a fourth dimension - ie, time.

 The first is easily perceived and demonstrated – see attached file.

A z-axis results in each metaphysical position being 3D spheroids, rather than a 2D point or sphere of influence.

The result relates a given metaphysical position to others and their ontological application.

 The latter is easily perceived, much more difficult to demonstrate, but is equally important.

 For the first, the z-axis, there are two opposite poles which refer to the ambition of Plotting Our Future, to wit:

  *    Epistemology serves Ontology.
     *   That is, the philosophical statement serves to explain further the nature of ontic reality, how it works, and enables the individual to utilize the knowledge to meet the goals of:
        *   The individual’s self.
        *   The other/s.
        *   The individual thriving within their ontic reality.
  *   Epistemology serves Epistemology.
     *   The purpose is to further explicate, complicate, or muddle the epistemological position taken.
     *   That is, the philosophical statement serves to further explicate the position taken but without necessarily relating it to the nature of ontic reality, how it works, or how the individual may utilize the knowledge to meet the goals of:
        *   The individual’s self.
        *   The other/s.
        *   The individual thriving within their ontic reality.

Arguably, the intent of any given metaphysical posture is, originally, to provide a rational and coherent view of the individual’s existence.  Subsequently, this came to include arguments intended to protect and preserve the metaphysical posture taken by obfuscation and sophistry.  For instance, on some list serves some positions taken are characterized by ego inflation, interpersonal aggression, and complex, insubstantial thought experiments while others (such as The TOK Society list serve) actively seek to affirm the fundamentals of knowledge, wisdom, and “real life” action.


 Hence, it is important for us to be able to locate any particular metaphysical stance being made about our possible futures in terms of whether it proposes something realistic and action enabling or whether it is simply an attempt to “dig in one’s heels” when confronted.


 It is also important to know how these metaphysical positions have (or have not) been modified over time.  For instance, the original, dominant and Christian metaphysical position and its myriad applications have changed in many ways since Medieval times.


 Unfortunately, I don’t have the skills needed to create an image of the temporal aspects.


 It is all theoretical, of course, but these two added dimensions would deepen our understanding of the metaphysical postures proposed and their relationship with each other.

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1


Best regards,

Waldemar

Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD

(Perseveret et Percipiunt)
503.631.8044

Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value. (A Einstein)

We are in search of a coherent ontology & epistemology to revitalize the human soul and spirit in the 21st Century. (G Henriques; The Theory of Knowledge Society)










On Dec 5, 2021, at 6:29 AM, lee simplyquality.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__simplyquality.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=TWdjJL1V7fK1SqlD2-2s_e_mps8lW4cSpQtc46OCjCw&s=J5fIQfEIaNSMBTdunbaSK6NgxvznFxJweHiBblGy7J8&e=> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________
Ryan,
Thanks for the Alan Watts video.
I you want to suggest adding an item to the collection at: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Level-5F5-5FResearch-5FCenter_Escaping-5FDiscontent&d=DwIGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=qeWXcTM8V3n1uV-ugfm3rdIho8BSfc36wMQJxhYS_j4&s=fXxtQXOAnFgPmstge-4wffRHFdUZXXDA7qQbsDZLmW8&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Level-5F5-5FResearch-5FCenter_Escaping-5FDiscontent&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=M2mNBsfonvv-yt9UMC10Pm0m0OnSGyE_oiDRinzRPI8&s=mSKsFHPw9mCyIwUkG6ztF6v9BbxvOI6PMLV2y5hGnYc&e=>
please provide text for the new entry.

Brandon,
If you can clarify the criteria used to include and exclude concepts from the list, that will be helpful.

Thanks,

Lee Beaumont

On Dec 5, 2021, at 5:48 AM, ryanrc111 <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________
this is a summary of my view of the :bohemian", but explained by Watt as being the life of a "Forest dweller" in India.

Alan Watts | Being alone | - YouTube<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DqqUVXVBwGgA&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=DGY8NbX54MD-soKVRti_vGCfn79A914d68UYZ9vbfV8&s=_Ko5wRPBG0_KirjA7Aqm8wHDe1Cbn2CnN6wqsV0Enk8&e=>

On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 6:31 PM Brandon Norgaard <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________

That’s awesome, thanks Lee!



Some thoughts:

  *   I can see how the vertical axis lines up with the Influence Matrix in a way similar to how Waldamar explained in a graphic shared with this list a few days ago, wherein he showed it was closely related to the upper vs. lower quadrants of Integral Theory.  This individual vs. group dynamic keeps popping up in all kinds of places.
  *   It is unclear what is the crux of the distinction between revolutionary and evolutionary approaches.  We might start with the overarching assumption among probably all of these approaches that there is a very high likelihood of negative large-scale impacts in the not-to-distant future.  That assumption is baked into the acknowledgement of the meta-crisis.  I’m interpreting your revolution vs. evolution dichotomy as hinging upon whether people in that camp want active interventions in an effort to make serious course-corrections or whether they want incremental change through a series of mini-interventions that would be informed by feedback from the prior mini-interventions.  Evolutionary approaches, I suppose, don’t have a grand strategy, or at least there is an assumption that there are natural forces driving this whole thing and the best we can do would be to make adjustments that might have a large-scale impact down the line, but not in a way we can foresee ahead of time.  Is this accurate, partially accurate?  Or perhaps am I really just misinterpreting?
  *   Isn’t doomer defeatist more of an individual thing rather than institutional?
  *   I find myself agreeing more so with the approaches closer to the center and less with those further out in one direction or another.  As I see it, we need a more balanced approach.



-Brandon



From: theory of knowledge society discussion <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> On Behalf Of lee simplyquality.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__simplyquality.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=DGY8NbX54MD-soKVRti_vGCfn79A914d68UYZ9vbfV8&s=2db6DRmaLVrVrt65guWQ-PyS_z9aYE1Sm_4NmjDfOd0&e=>
Sent: Wednesday, December 1, 2021 5:32 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: ToK: Plotting our Future



CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

________________________________

ToK Folk:



I took a crack at plotting the concepts listed  at  https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Level-5F5-5FResearch-5FCenter_Escaping-5FDiscontent&d=DwIGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=qeWXcTM8V3n1uV-ugfm3rdIho8BSfc36wMQJxhYS_j4&s=fXxtQXOAnFgPmstge-4wffRHFdUZXXDA7qQbsDZLmW8&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Level-5F5-5FResearch-5FCenter_Escaping-5FDiscontent&d=DwMFAg&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ZGlLUyQYhmS1e_AEhYTCtpeaEwId_wmwoICfGJUvzX8&s=lcZk2TUW_kidgjB9K5xi1sxohABiwWFuidO_-7sfdmA&e=> on a grid, shown below.

I used the dimensions of individual <-> institutional shown vertically, and revolutions <-> evolution plotted horizontally.

My placement of each concept is approximate at best.

What do you think?

Are the dimensions chosen the best for illuminating the differences in the approaches?

Is each approach properly placed?

Does this analysis and display provide any insights?



Thanks,



Lee Beaumont





############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1

<PLOTTING OUR FUTURE - 2.0.docx>


############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1