Exactly. It's absurd to say the designers of any system absolutely intended any and all outcomes of said system, in the same way It's absurd to attribute someone's intent as whatever you deem to be the outcome. To kind of bring it all around, it's absurd to say the designers of our overall system legitimately intended all the flaws that came with it. In fact, with things like the [American] Healthcare system, it wasn't really "designed" so much as it kinda happened. The heuristic to think of the system as working as intended is a great way to analyze it and all, but it's still important to keep in mind that the illuminati wasn't up there wringing their hands and cackling about how much suffering the barbaric American Healthcare System would cause.
NoTagBacks
I'm not sure why you got down-voted for this as I think you illustrate the intent of the above-mentioned heuristic quite well. The intent of the heuristic isn't to objectively define what the purpose of a system is(because, well... lol), but to change the framing of it in order to better understand it's function and how well it serves it's "purpose". People who design and implement these systems tend to become married to the idea of that system just needing a tweak here and there to finally serve it's purpose 100%, usually without considering that the system may already be working optimally.
The reason I think your example of the Healthcare System(in America to be specific) is a great example is that those who are served by said system see it's flaws first-hand versus those who design and maintain it. To the individual(s) on the receiving end, the purpose of the system is effectively something completely different than the original purpose given. To then apply the framing that the purpose of the Healthcare system is to add stress, bankrupt the sick, skyrocket costs, make people die from neglect, etc, we then see the system not as a flawed one that just needs a few tweaks, but as fundamentally missing the mark before it's epistemological foundation is even laid. We're able to get the engineers see what the maintenance crew sees, so to speak.
What the heuristic doesn't do is objectively establish the purpose of a system. That's silly, as purpose is necessarily subjective. I think our boy was trying to find a way of not only better analyzing a system, but to also help the designers of those systems see it from the perspective of those on the receiving end. What better way than to think of a system as working exactly as intended?
As for me, I think we tend to subconsciously project our intent into the world, effectively turning our framing of things we do/create as objectively inheriting the purpose we had in mind, regardless of the outcome. This can really muddy the waters with what we mean when we discuss something like purpose, which I suspect is the source of apparent confusion within this particular thread. Purpose being subjective, it will change from person to person, and purpose being subjective, it's a poor indicator of how a system functions.
Hey, sorry for the late reply, but like... ya know, ADHD.
Sounds to me like you already practice some Stoic principles and that's fucking fantastic! I think you might also benefit from the writings of Epictetus, specifically in his Discourses. He talks about the Dichotomy of Control, which I think is something that would be beneficial to you to study. It's certainly been a world of help for clarity of thought for me.
Hello, so I'm not autistic as far as I'm aware, but I do have ADHD-C and have also greatly struggled with anxiety throughout my life. I hope my experience and knowledge can be of some use to you.
To start off, man, hard relate on both those fears. I mean different mechanism for me in terms of fear of trying new things since it's more of a "how much time and money am I gonna sink into this obsessively only to completely lose interest in an indeterminate amount of time?". And to your second point, yeah, the world isn't built for those of us who aren't nt. I could go on and on about many anxieties I continue to struggle with to this day, including worry about never truly gaining mastery over myself, losing access to healthcare and/or medication my wife and I need, and external events of climate change, political turmoil, anti-intellectualism, misinformation campaigns, and academics seeming to be losing their fucking minds when it comes to anything philosophy related. I just want to let you know that you're not alone.
As for how I've dealt with this in my life, it's primarily come down to Stoic philosophy. Especially when it comes to the anxiety, it's usually about the framing of how I think about something--much like how modern therapy looks for underlying beliefs and/or experiences that may be a root cause. Someone cuts me off while I'm driving, so I become angry, but it isn't the other driver that has made me angry, it's my opinion on the matter. While it's true that they shouldn't do such things because it's unsafe and can cause harm, it's possible that they didn't do that on purpose and/or out of malice. Even if they did, what would my anger truly accomplish other than increasing my potential to escalate the situation? In fact, if they truly are a 'dumbass' or 'idiot', why would I become angry with them when they act according to their nature? Ultimately, I'm not in control of that person, so why react in emotional futility? I'm in control of me and how I treat others with respect, kindness, and charity. I just give them some extra space for everyone's safety and move on. It's about what I can and cannot control. I cannot control these externalities of reality. It's reality, why not just neutrally accept it as such? I must keep in mind that I always have the option of not having an opinion.
I've always struggled with anxiety in my relationships and my marriage is no exception. I fucking love my wife. She my best friend, the best lover I've ever had, and my whole world. But I don't own her. She isn't mine to keep forever. As the bittersweet saying goes; this too shall pass. She could leave me, she could suddenly and rapidly decline in health, she could die today or in 3,000 years, we could be married for just one more year or maybe 100 more years, who knows? What I do know and can do now is love and appreciate her now, because, well, she is what matters to me and someday she will no longer be in my life. I must admit that despite my many years of therapy, bettering myself, and practicing Stoic philosophy, I'm certain I couldn't handle suddenly losing my wife right now. I don't mean that in the sense that I ought to be able to emotionally shrug it off, because that's insane, unrealistic, and counter to Stoic philosophy, but rather in the sense that I would lose rationality. While I recognize this is a problem, I have found that it's something that is too insurmountable for me to master on my own. So yeah, I still need therapy and I must accept that this is where I am in my efforts to master myself.
The important techniques I've learned that have worked for me that come from Stoic philosophy is daily self-reflection, mindfulness, constant reminders of what I do/do not control, reminders that I will inevitably run into daily troubles, and 'amor fati'(or 'love your fate', that is: to not only accept your life as it is, but to love and appreciate it while you have what you have). Constant self-reflection is crucial because no one truly "controls" how they immediately react to things, as it's the beliefs that will dictate the outcome of your reaction. I became more calm as a driver because of my end-of-day self-reflections in examining why I reacted the ways I did and honestly reasoning with myself about it, which led to me catching myself in those reactions more and more until the unreasonable behavior waned into the past. It's the same with my anxieties, although much more of a game of whack-a-mole and work in progress. But boy have those moles dramatically decreased their frequency in popping up and boy have I regained so much of my life by no longer ceding control of myself to them.
If you want further resources, I strongly recommend reading Meditations by Marcus Aurelius. I can also recommend videos from The Daily Stoic with the asterisk that he can get a little... 'markety' every now and again. As I like to say; eat the meat and throw out the bones. And, of course, I always recommend finding a good therapist that you click with as this stuff is their specialty. I mean, obviously, sure, but I think it's worth mentioning that much of modern therapy finds it's roots in Stoic Philosophy. Anyway, I hope my wall of text is of some use to you or anyone else who took the time to read. I'm open to questions, comments, and any accusations... or just a shrug. It's up to you, afterall, I'm not in control of you.😘
TL;DR: Can relate, although not autistic. You're not alone, your feelings are valid, I recommend Stoic philosophy, I give examples of how it helped me, read Meditations, and I feel gross for using an emoji, but like ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Eh, I dunno that I'd actually characterize him as a liberal so much as him being an authoritarian that just pushed whatever happened to serve him at any point. Kinda in the same vein of fascists not having any economic ideology, just whatever serves their ideal of the state at any given moment. So yeah, I certainly agree with your sentiment that Stalin certainly was not a communist, but more because he only cared about gaining/maintaining power rather than actually subscribing to any economic theory.