Wisdom is Frame Wizardry (2/2)

Relevance Realization and Soulmaking: Choosing and Crafting Frames

Wisdom is the art of recognising, breaking, choosing, and crafting frames

The most powerful Frame Wizards are masters at selecting and crafting frames. We’ve elaborated on the preliminaries of recognising and breaking frames in part 1.

In this piece, we’ll explore how skillful frame-work enables the wise person to take effective action, leading to well-being in even the most wicked situations. This is the Kung-Fu of sense-making.

Choosing Frames

Vervaeke describes wisdom as involving the transformation of cognition to afford life improvement and flourishing. Central to this is the concept of relevance realisation - our ability to ignore irrelevant information and foreground what is relevant. In other words, choosing the frame that will be most adaptive for the situation at hand. 

After a bad frame has been recognised and broken, it needs to be replaced by a more skillful frame. How are you supposed to know which frame is more helpful in a given context? 

Relevance Realisation and Ways of Knowing 

If wisdom is the “right use of knowledge”, it’s important to have a sense of the different ways of knowing. There are nested hierarchies of frames (similar to priors in predictive processing) and one way of categorizing that stack is as different ways of knowing.

Each of Vervaeke’s 4Ps is a different layer of the hierarchy of frames
(or hierarchical priors in predictive processing). 

These are the 4P in a nutshell (going from surface to deeper layers of the hierarchy):

• Propositional knowing is book-smarts. Facts, beliefs, rules. Thinky knowing. Knowing about things, about what is “true”. This is very useful but insufficient for living effectively.

• Procedural knowing is knowing how to do things in practice, it’s about skills. e.g. knowing how to use a hammer (instead of knowing lots of facts about hammers).

• Perspectival knowing is about how to perceive the world. Not just thinking, but really inhabiting a perspective, a specific configuration of subject-object.

• Participatory knowing is about the active relationship to the arena we’re operating in. How we interact with and are shaped by our environment.

These ways of knowing support and constrain each other. A propositional theory will limit your options of things to try, making the search space manageable. Perspectival lenses will make some facts salient and not others. Participatory knowing will deploy the procedural skills you’ve built up at the right time, and so on.

Relevance realisation is active already in choosing which way of knowing is the most relevant. Is this about information or is it a skill issue? Or maybe it’s about where I’m coming from or how I relate to the world? We can therefore distinguish between propositional frames, procedural frames, etc. 

In a next step, relevance realisation is also active within each way of knowing. Frames exist within each of the 4P. Which facts are more pertinent? What methods or skills are relevant? What perspective might be most fruitful? What participation is most effective or meaningful? 

Facts and skills are easier to treat as objects and shift around. Perspectival and participatory frames seem to be less conscious, lower level, and therefore require greater skill in recognising and breaking frames to be able to shift. 

Epistemic Contexts and Heuristics

Frame wizardry is a skill (procedural) that requires being able to take even perspectival and participatory frames as an object. So harping on theory (propositional) has limited use. However, some heuristics can help narrow down frame selection and support relevance relalisation. The following three seem most pertinent:  

• Metarationality (Chapman)

• 4 Quadrants (Wilber)

• Cynefin (Snowden)

Metarationality

Knowing which context you are navigating is key for guiding relevance realisation. For example, situations with a clearly defined and bounded “problem-solving” context (like chess or a maths problem) require different frames than more open-ended situations (like a relationship conflict). David Chapman’s work on Metarationality is very helpful here. This is especially relevant for procedural frames but also implies perspectival frame shifts. For instance, there is a single “right” solution in maths whereas relationships have a more complex topology of adaptive configurations. Trying to “solve” your relationships will get you in trouble.

Wilber’s Quadrants

As much Wilber’s map-mania and developmental rainbow spirals make me cringe, the 4 quadrants are pure gold for differentiating between epistemic contexts - they’ve worked like a cheat code for me. Science (external/individual) implies different methods and truth claims than culture (interior/collective). 

Age-old debates like free will vs. determinism, different conceptions on ethics (utilitarianism vs. virtue ethics etc.) and the hard problem of consciousness seem mostly like misunderstandings in which the different sides argue exclusively from one of the quadrants and neglect the others. Different propositional (truth claims) procedural (methods), and perspectival (ways of looking) frames are adaptive for each different quadrant. Participatory frames are most relevant in the individual quadrants, where agency is more important. 

Cynefin

The final tool to support frame selection is Dave Snowden’s Cynefin, which parses the world into different contexts where causality works differently (and which therefore require different frames): 

The entire stack of frames, from propositional to participatory will change according to the context. For example, strictly rational methods like optimizations can be applied in a clear or complicated situation, whereas a complex context requires interactive safe-to-fail probes. Chaotic contexts require more unhinged dabbling. 

Frames come in Metamemes

Finally, there is something to be said about the coherence of frames across levels - frames come in clusters. Clusters of frames that scaffold entire worldviews can be called Metamemes. Metamemes are a set of frames across the 4P. For example, consumer capitalism not just carries the propositional frames of economics and political ideology, but also 

• procedural frames of paid labour, enterprises, and the market economy 

• perspectival frames of the individual (interacting with market and the state)

• participatory frames of utility maximization and competition 

It is often easier to switch between Metamemes wholesale rather than just swapping out an individual frame within them. Brendan Graham Dempsy calls the capacity to switch between meta-memes toggling. For example, if you find yourself bored and disconnected, consider taking on an animist worldview for a few days (see  “Magic is real, if you know how to look”). Sometimes, it’s more interesting to feel alive than to feel you are “scientifically accurate”.

Experimentation is Key

Experimentation with different frames is the most important practice for becoming a frame wizard. 

Vervaeke’s work (4P-RR) and the heuristics outlined above provide the theory for choosing the right types of frames. But that is all just propositional knowledge, and wisdom is about the right use of knowledge (procedural). So at best, the theory helps guide the experimentation to frames that are more likely helpful for a given situation. 

Go forth and experiment! Try on different frames like clothes, checking out which ones fit best, and which combinations produce the cutest outfit. 

Here are a few invitations for frames to try on for each way of knowing below the propositional: 

Procedural

• Skip through this article only reading the titles, quotes, and bold words. Try to get the Gestalt of what is being conveyed without any of the details. 

• Pick a paragraph and read every sentence twice.

Perspectival

• Pick a paragraph and read it with the frame that this is all just performative ramblings of half-baked twitter anons. 

• Now read the same passage with a sense of reverence for the embodied wisdom shining through the words, knowing that the authors are a mere mouthpiece for a whole community of wisdom.

Participatory

• Reflect on what information in this piece you found interesting and worthwhile, and what parts you think could be improved. (shares in the comments are appreciated).

• Pick a paragraph and read it with the awareness that the meaning of the words only emerges in interaction with you, the reader. Find a way to change your meaning-making.   

If you can’t be bothered with one of these exercises, notice what frames have influenced that choice. 

Crafting Frames

Most frames are ready-made. They are cultural code that we have acquired over time. To apply the 4P once more: Propositional frames are the stories we have picked up whereas procedural frames are learned skills, e.g. the English language or calculus. Perspectival and participatory frames are usually unconscious, concerning fundamental ways of perceiving and acting. 

The pinnacle of frame wizardry is being able to craft your own, custom-made frames on the fly. Frames lower down the stack on the perspectival and participatory levels are especially powerful. 

A humble success of mine in this domain is the following: I had previously struggled to be conscientious with household tasks, most notably cleaning the shower with a squeegee after use. Until I crafted a frame for it - I now approach cleaning the shower as a spiritual practice. I’m repeating a mantra in my head and consider each stroke of the squeegee as a deep bow before God. This frame is mostly active on the perspectival and participatory levels, imbuing the previously annoying procedure of cleaning the shower with rich meaning. 

Writing your own Life Story

While most propositional frames are on the collective level and therefore hard to change, there is a lot of value in crafting your own propositional frames when it comes to personal narratives. A hallmark of entering the self-authoring mode is taking responsibility for your experience. From being a character in someone else’s story, you become both the protagonist and the author of your life story. Who are you? What brought you here? Where are you going? These are questions that don’t have an “objective” answer - rather, they should be answered with an idiosyncratic story that helps you become the version of yourself that you want to be. 

A personal mythos is a propositional frame that is custom-made for the circumstances and aspirations of your life. The tools of CBT are relevant here, as well as a general facility with narrative. Jung’s notion of archetypes and the process of individuation seems very helpful in this regard. Even more so, his autobiography "Memories, Dreams, Reflections" exemplifies the art of personal myth making. Inevitably, this propositional frame will affect changes deeper down the stack and change your perspectives and ways of acting in the world. 

Dabbling and Imaginal Play

The easiest way to craft procedural frames is to add some perturbations to your established ways of doing things. Brian Eno’s Oblique Strategies are a brilliant tool for adding some spice to rusty processes. 

More generally, learning new skills is probably the best way to become better at this. Especially learning by doing. While it takes much longer than following prescriptions and learning from a teacher, the art of dabbling is the supreme discipline of procedural frame crafting. You could approach any skill in this way, from surfing to drawing.

Activities where idiosyncratic processes are at the very center are especially relevant. Examples include improv theatre, contact improv, or contemporary expressive dance (gaga dance is a personal favourite). 

It’s not an accident that children’s play is full of imagination. Tapping into the imaginal (in the sense of Henry Corbin) is a great way to craft procedural frames. For example, one might imagine the body to be made of water and move accordingly. Or draw as if the brush was an extension of your hand. Can you swap the internal voice you hear when reading into that of your favourite singer or actor? Or if you’re up for a challenge: Can you read these words as if you were touching the concepts conveyed with your fingers in the dark? 

Soulmaking and Skillful Fabrication 

The deepest well of knowledge for crafting perspectival and participatory is the work of meditation maverick Rob Burbea. His concept of “Ways of Looking” has inspired the use of “frames” in the first place. We co-construct (“fabricate”) our reality, and therefore, we can ask which Ways of Looking are most helpful in any situation. Coming from the Insight Meditation tradition, one consideration is which frames produce the least suffering, or the most well-being. But Rob doesn’t stop there and continues asking:

• Which frame creates the deepest, richest meaning (“soulfulness”)? 

• Which images of Self and Other facilitate these experiences? 

• How can emotion and somatic sensations support this frame?

In his countless hours of freely available talks, he unfolds this practice into a new style of spiritual practice called “Soulmaking Dharma”. A key difference from more traditional meditation is that we’re not just interested in deconstructing perceptions but in (re)constructing them in the most interesting ways. Imaginal practice plays a key part in this - combining stories, visuals, and emotions in ways that support meaning, beauty, and skillful action. As opposed to more traditional Buddhist practice, Soulmaking Dharma embraces desire and aims to deepen it instead of suppressing it. The goal is to enable a positive feedback loop between desire, perception, and interpretation that unfolds naturally into richer and more beautiful states. 

Burbea’s work offers a sophisticated practice for crafting frames at the participatory and perspectival levels, calling us to become co-creators of our experience and artists of perception. 

4E Frames

As with any learning process, there are different phases to becoming a frame wizard. As you train, manipulating frames is slow and deliberate (System 2, in Kahneman’s terms). The more adept you get, the more automated and unconscious the manipulation of frames will become (System 1). The frames that work well for you will become more and more embodied and you will apply them spontaneously. The job of a deliberate frame mechanic will only come up occasionally when you feel stuck (and an unhelpful frame is active for some reason). 

In addition to embodiment, the other 3E of 4E cognitive science also seem relevant: Enactive, Embedded, Extended. 

• Frames are enactive because they are usually tied to activities. With time, activities  automatically trigger the best available frame. 

• Frames are embedded in contexts: the social relationships present, the resources available, the environment, etc. all influence which frame is best.

• Finally, frames are extended. Your environment can help you scaffold frames, from the skillful use of your phone to more old-school tech like post-it notes. 

Extended frames become more and more important as technology advances. The use of AI is just one example of this. When and how do you use LLMs? In what situation do you use which style of prompting? 

Frames for Writing

Finally, I want to conclude with some more personal reflection on the practice of writing. At this stage, the most skillful frames for writing I’ve discovered are the following: 

• Writing to digest and clarify what I have learned in a pithy, fun way

• Writing as if to a dear friend, wanting to help with humour and humility 

• Writing to find the others, to attract kindred spirits and fellow travellers 

• Writing alive a part of myself that yearns for a certain kind of expression

What other frames could be interesting, helpful, or fun? What if I wrote as if every word mattered greatly? As if each sentence was a song or a prayer? How does my writing process change when I write together with friends (like Xiq, in this case)? Or what if I wrote from different parts of myself? How would the cynic dissect concepts, and how would the dreamer express his flaming soul? Could I write as if I’m merely channeling an intersubjective entity (the octopus)?

Maybe you’ll find out. Thanks for being here, for reading this.