I view the article as aspirational, and a lot of the comments here seem to fetishize a trinity of time and certitude and causality. I appreciate attempts to ex

I view the article as aspirational, and a lot of the comments here seem to fetishize a trinity of time and certitude and causality. I appreciate attempts to explore diagramming, and so I appreciate the article. I am also informed by past exposure to Markov chains. I am aware of Prigogine, and so I accept that reasoning about a dynamic system relies on its dynamic state. A simple example would be: opening the gates causes water to be released from the dam But that's predicated on there being water captured behind the dam. Which requires rainfall. It also requires a dam. A different example would be: adding additional propellant makes it go faster This is reasonably straightforward construction for a projectile, less so for a jet engine or a piston engine which dynamically reaches the functional state which we wish to reason about. As for LSD, how did the author miss Tim Leary? Referring to a Leary personality diagnosis radar chart I can't find an obvious mapping in the dynamic of post vs comments. Best WAG is that neither is expressing dominance (both are seeking order and guidance), with the article more in the region of acceptance and the comments more in the range of suspicion and hostility.