On the other hand, that probably makes members feel much less involved in the Church.
It seems to be pretty clear from here (second point under herding cats) that the calling doesn’t exist to get stuff done (though that is a great side effect) but to keep you coming back. If you don’t show up, then who will teach your class?
If there’s a reason to come back other than feeling personally involved in the group on that level, then why pull wool over people’s eyes to maintain attendance when you can actually just be worth coming back to?*
On the other hand, it seems (based on my personal experience leading a volunteer robotics team) like keeping people involved is a good way to keep people in a group. But I’m not convinced that the optimal tradeoff between inclusion and inefficiency is almost pure inefficiency.
Like, ostensibly rationality classes should help you improve your life. People are already willing to pay for classes in that. If rationalist groups helped me have fun and live a better life, then I personally would continue attending for the tangible benefits, and not need convincing that I’m needed.
I think that a difference between rationalist groups and religions should be that rationalist groups exist for reasons other than their own propagation.
If there’s a reason to come back other than feeling personally involved in the group on that level, then why pull wool over people’s eyes to maintain attendance when you can actually just be worth coming back to?
Enjoying and wanting are different- I might genuinely enjoy services more than sleeping in, but only choose to go to services instead of sleep in if I’ve committed to going.
It also seems likely that personal involvement magnifies other things (that is, you can’t separate them in the hunt for efficiency without losses), but I’m not as sure of that one.
It seems to be pretty clear from here (second point under herding cats) that the calling doesn’t exist to get stuff done (though that is a great side effect) but to keep you coming back. If you don’t show up, then who will teach your class?
If there’s a reason to come back other than feeling personally involved in the group on that level, then why pull wool over people’s eyes to maintain attendance when you can actually just be worth coming back to?*
On the other hand, it seems (based on my personal experience leading a volunteer robotics team) like keeping people involved is a good way to keep people in a group. But I’m not convinced that the optimal tradeoff between inclusion and inefficiency is almost pure inefficiency.
Like, ostensibly rationality classes should help you improve your life. People are already willing to pay for classes in that. If rationalist groups helped me have fun and live a better life, then I personally would continue attending for the tangible benefits, and not need convincing that I’m needed.
I think that a difference between rationalist groups and religions should be that rationalist groups exist for reasons other than their own propagation.
Enjoying and wanting are different- I might genuinely enjoy services more than sleeping in, but only choose to go to services instead of sleep in if I’ve committed to going.
It also seems likely that personal involvement magnifies other things (that is, you can’t separate them in the hunt for efficiency without losses), but I’m not as sure of that one.