Why will the important thinkers of the future be religious ones?
web3 vs. cybersecurity, integrative thinking, moderation, Y(D)OLO.
This is essay 2 of 6 essays for 1729 Writers Cohort #1. Apply to 1729 today at 1729.com.
The shortest version of the idea:
We need more integrative thinkers with moderation as a key virtue and people who don’t believe in YOLO.
Web3 Believers and Cybersecurity Sceptics
I got two types of people on my Twitter feeds: the web3 proponents and the cybersecurity sceptics.
The web3 folks are optimistic, visionary, rebellious, playful, and dreamers. They want a fresh start. Bitcoin is a fresh start, 1729 is a fresh start, NFTs are a fresh start, and DAOs are a fresh start.
Now the cybersecurity folks. They think, “how will this be used for evil?” They think about risks, safety, and privacy. They are practical people that will remind you if your plan is too high and provide pragmatic solutions to solve it.
Both usually have opposing opinions that I believe are healthy for our future success.
Examples of opposing views on DAOs (Decentralized autonomous organizations) by web3 believer Chris Dixon and Infosec thought leader Jake Williams.
And.
If this is your first time reading the word DAO, we can combine the above tweets to get an understanding.
So, DAO is an online community with (computerised) rules over its financial resources that are usually hardly decentralised.
The Benefit of DAO.
Take the awesome Wikipedia. They are not DAO, but they have the benefit of a DAO: People or communities contributing and improving something together.
DAO connects you with people from anywhere in the world to collaborate on a cause that your DAO believes in. An article from a fellow 1729 writer gave various examples of DAOs.
It’s a fresh start version of a tribe.
But, it’s not perfect.
And the critics were spot on. The vision of autonomy was that governments can't touch your money if computer programs are making all the decisions. However, this idea was (still) impractical to implement.
Also, usually, the majority of tokens are held by a few folks, thus having control of the outcome of "votes."
I'm not sure if "voting" is always the right choice either? Imagine the DAO having a cyber-attack that requires quick containment of the incident and waiting for the outcome of the voting members?
What is this article about?
This article is not about finding the winner. It’s not choosing between. It’s not about picking sides.
It’s about tinkering with opposite views, which is the recipe to creating the solutions for our problems.
Integrative thinking
I love Malcolm Gladwell, so I dig for books he loves.
One recommendation is a business book called The Opposable Mind by Roger Martin.
Gladwell about the book, "explores what makes great CEOs stand out from their peers. I realise that there are thousands of business books on the subject, but, trust me, this is the first to really answer the question."
The answer? Integrative thinking.
Great leaders can hold two extreme opposing views in their heads. They can be chill to not quick to decide, grasp the essence of both, and choose a different solution that is better than each.
“Integrative thinking shows us a way past the binary limits of either–or. It shows us that there’s a way to integrate the advantages of one solution without cancelling out the advantages of an alternative solution. Integrative thinking affords us, in the words of the poet Wallace Stevens, “the choice not between, but of.”
At the essence of integrative thinking is my favourite virtue: Moderation.
Aristotle calls it The Golden Mean. Most virtues, the philosopher explained, exist as a midpoint between two vices. Courage exists in the middle of recklessness on the one end and cowardice on the other. Love sits between obsession and apathy. Justice, between authoritarianism and anarchy.
Islam calls it Wasat. Tim Ferriss said, “No hurry, no pause.” Ryan Holiday said, “tolerant with others, strict with yourself.”
I’m more curious about the people's side of the story.
What type of thinker is apt with integrative thinking and moderation?
You Don’t Only Live Once
Tyler Cowen said in his blog post that the important thinkers of the future be religious ones. He got six reasons mentioned in the article.
Another reason why I believe religious thinkers embody integrative thinking is that they believe in the afterlife.
What?! Bear with me.
The culture is now geared towards hedonistic, indulgence and pleasure hence YOLO.
Pursue your self-interest, not the interest nor the benefit of your family, your tribe, your community, but you.
You're only here once. Enjoy. Indulge. Taste as much as you can. Chase pleasure as much as you can. Because you only live once. And there's no thought to the afterlife.
YOLO is choosing one extreme.
If you believe in the afterlife, you will prepare for it. Preparation requires thinking and balancing extremes.
It makes sense if the future influential thinker is religious ones. They're brainwashed to think further.
You have more than a billion choices online. With a few clicks, you could be about anywhere. Thanks for reading this today.