Acting with Consistency of Behavior or of Outcome
Two personas
- develop a set of core ideals and behavior principles that can be applied as solutions unilaterally in all situations.
- determine how you want the world to end up and make whatever decision in a given situation seems to advance towards that goal.
1 always knows how to act in order to maintain consistency. can always call out others who act against that consistency. 1 won’t necessarily get particular outcomes. unclear what result this consistency will have.
2 can always feel justified in their actions because it serves their end goal. if their end goal is ‘good’ (in their view), then all of their actions are consistent with the goal to the extent that the actions serve the goal - even though any two actions may appear to be in opposition to each other.
- In what way can these two personas come to agreements?
- What types of problems will they forever be divided on?
- What are some examples of people playing these two games?
- What would it mean for someone to flip-flop between 1 and 2? In what circumstances would they switch and how does that fit into the definitions of 1 and 2?
- Would the above switching tendency actually constitute an additional persona?