Tendency to Think about High-level Things

• I think there is a general tendency in Myself.

  • I titled it “tendency” because I’m not sure if it’s good or bad (I think there are both sides).

• Is this something like Structuralism?

  • tkgshn also often abstractly perceives things when they have a habit of thinking about phenomena relatively.
    • However, if you directly apply this to the “act of creating something concrete” like a project, it often doesn’t communicate well with people who don’t have the same tendency (even if you think it’s somewhat concrete).

• What is considered high-level?

  • Game rules, assumptions, mechanisms, systems, and meta-level discussions.
  • If those change, it affects things lower than them.

• I find it more enjoyable to think about these things.

  • I feel that thinking about concrete things is unproductive and boring when there is room to think about high-level things.
  • I find it interesting to observe and think about what changes occur as a result of changes in high-level things.

• Are concrete things just means?

• (It’s just a matter of expression, but) I’m starting to feel that it’s more accurate to express layers as “low-level” (blu3mo).

  • Low-level

• The reason for that.

• Reasons why this seems bad.

  • Even if high-level things change over time, thinking concretely for a certain period of time is valid.
  • We don’t live for 10,000 years.

Concrete examples

• Politics
  • Improving the Mechanism Rather Than Hitting Water
• Environmental issues
  • Science falls into the category of “high-level things.”
  • Game rules
• Technological Deterministic Thinking
• Favorite subjects
• Entertainment
  • 50-person Craft
    • I find it fascinating to see how players adapt when new rules are created in the game.
  • Science fiction
    • It’s interesting to imagine things that emerge from setting rules
• Implementation
  • Autonomous Distributed Systems
• This also seems to fit Explaining things simply.