Level 1 (referential, or epistemic): Generating a business plan and financial projections as an integral part of the process by which you decide whether your startup is worth trying.
Level 2 (lying): Publicizing a business plan you don’t expect to carry out, to obscure your secret plan to pivot to something that would undercut existing power, so they don’t crush you immediately.
Level 3 (relating): Coming up with a business plan so you feel like a Real Business, and feel less impostor anxiety, and then feeling a need to rationalize whatever future decisions you make as somehow Part of the Plan.
Level 4 (magical): Coming up with a business plan and financial projections because that’s something venture capitalists want, and no one thinks that anyone else cares whether the plan is literally true or even possible, it’s just one of the theatrical hoops you gotta jump through for the vibe to feel right.
At the risk of being political because I couldn’t think of a better example:
Consider people advocating for/against laws on late trimester abortions.
AFAICT, there’s only a very small minority that believes that most abortion is Ok but late trimester abortion is not. For most people making these arguments the facts about pain etc are just a game trying to get more or less restrictions on abortion placed. Everyone is just trying to find the facts that move their particular position (allowing or not allowing abortion) closer.
As far as I understand, at level 3 ostensibly factual statements are instrumentalized in the service of ideological concerns (ideology is the deciding agent), whereas at level 4 ideology itself becomes a malleable object that is instrumentalized in the service of the pursuit of power (in the limit case, Moloch is the deciding agent). At level 3, what matters is that your side is winning, at level 4, what matters is that you’re on the winning side.
Level 1: “There’s a lion across the river.” = There’s a lion across the river. Level 2: “There’s a lion across the river.” = I don’t want to go (or have other people go) across the river. Level 3: “There’s a lion across the river.” = I’m with the popular kids who are too cool to go across the river. Level 4: “There’s a lion across the river.” = A firm stance against trans-river expansionism focus grouped well with undecided voters in my constituency.
I too have trouble thinking of a non-political real-life example (professional politics, at least by reputation, very much seems to be a level 4 discipline), so feel free to disregard what follows, but a striking example would be some hypothetical ex-Soviet functionary whose career trajectory dictated seamlessly shifting between being a communist in the 80′s, a liberal democrat in the 90′s and early 2000′s, and a conservative nationalist by the 2010′s.
1-3 I can wrap my head around. But can you provide some examples of what level 4 looks like?
Level 1 (referential, or epistemic): Generating a business plan and financial projections as an integral part of the process by which you decide whether your startup is worth trying.
Level 2 (lying): Publicizing a business plan you don’t expect to carry out, to obscure your secret plan to pivot to something that would undercut existing power, so they don’t crush you immediately.
Level 3 (relating): Coming up with a business plan so you feel like a Real Business, and feel less impostor anxiety, and then feeling a need to rationalize whatever future decisions you make as somehow Part of the Plan.
Level 4 (magical): Coming up with a business plan and financial projections because that’s something venture capitalists want, and no one thinks that anyone else cares whether the plan is literally true or even possible, it’s just one of the theatrical hoops you gotta jump through for the vibe to feel right.
Yeah, I don’t really get the difference between levels 3 and 4.
At the risk of being political because I couldn’t think of a better example:
Consider people advocating for/against laws on late trimester abortions.
AFAICT, there’s only a very small minority that believes that most abortion is Ok but late trimester abortion is not. For most people making these arguments the facts about pain etc are just a game trying to get more or less restrictions on abortion placed. Everyone is just trying to find the facts that move their particular position (allowing or not allowing abortion) closer.
Edit: Actually, this is more like stage 3.
As far as I understand, at level 3 ostensibly factual statements are instrumentalized in the service of ideological concerns (ideology is the deciding agent), whereas at level 4 ideology itself becomes a malleable object that is instrumentalized in the service of the pursuit of power (in the limit case, Moloch is the deciding agent). At level 3, what matters is that your side is winning, at level 4, what matters is that you’re on the winning side.
Level 1: “There’s a lion across the river.” = There’s a lion across the river.
Level 2: “There’s a lion across the river.” = I don’t want to go (or have other people go) across the river.
Level 3: “There’s a lion across the river.” = I’m with the popular kids who are too cool to go across the river.
Level 4: “There’s a lion across the river.” = A firm stance against trans-river expansionism focus grouped well with undecided voters in my constituency.
I too have trouble thinking of a non-political real-life example (professional politics, at least by reputation, very much seems to be a level 4 discipline), so feel free to disregard what follows, but a striking example would be some hypothetical ex-Soviet functionary whose career trajectory dictated seamlessly shifting between being a communist in the 80′s, a liberal democrat in the 90′s and early 2000′s, and a conservative nationalist by the 2010′s.
What a fantastic distinction, thank you.
I’ve talked about simulacra levels with Ben a ton and this comment is the single most helpful thing in understanding them or explaining to others.
Thanks! I appreciate the feedback, and I’m glad to hear my thoughts were in the right direction and helpful to others.
Yeah that helps a lot.