I’m starting to think Framing is everything.

Framing
The process by which individuals construct and interpret
their reality—concsiously or unconsciously—through specific lenses or
perspectives.

My working definition

Here are some of the framing dichotomies I’m noticing right now in the
different groups of people I associate with and see interacting online.

AI and the future of work

FRAME 1: AI is just another example of big tech and big business

and capitalism, which is all a scam designed to keep the rich and
successful on top. And AI will make it even worse, screwing over all the
regular people and giving all their money to the people who already have
the most. Takeaway:
Why learn AI when it’s all part of the evil machine of capitalism and
greed?
FRAME 2: AI is just technology, and technology is inevitable. We
don’t choose technological revolutions; they just happen. And when they
do, it’s up to us to figure out how to adapt. That’s often disruptive
and difficult, but that’s what technology is: disruption. The best way
to proceed is with cautious optimism and energy, and to figure out how
to make the best of it.
Takeaway: AI isn’t good or evil; it’s just inevitable technological
change. Get out there and learn it!

America and race/gender

FRAME 1: America is founded on racism and sexism, is still extremely
racist and sexist, and that means anyone successful in America is complicit.
Anyone not succeeding in America (especially if they’re a non-white male)
can point to this as the reason. So it’s kind of ok to just disconnect from
the whole system of everything, because it’s all poisoned and ruined.
Takeaway:
Why try if the entire system is stacked against you?

FRAME 2: America started with a ton of racism and sexism, but that
was mostly because the whole world was that way at the time. Since its
founding, America has done more than any country to enable women and
non-white people to thrive in business and politics. We know this is true
because the numbers of non-white-male (or nondominant group) representation
in business and politics vastly outnumber any other country or region in the
world. Takeaway:
The US actually has the most diverse successful people on the planet. Get
out there and hustle!

Success and failure

FRAME 1: The only people who can succeed in the west are those who
have massive advantages, like rich parents, perfect upbringings, the best
educations, etc. People like that are born lucky, and although they might
work a lot they still don’t really deserve what they have. Startup founders
and other entrepreneurs like that are benefitting from tons of privilege and
we need to stop looking up to them as examples. Takeaway:
Why try if it’s all stacked against you?

FRAME 2: It’s absolutely true that having a good upbringing is an
advantage, i.e., parents who emphasized school and hard work and attainment
as a goal growing up. But many of the people with that mentality are
actually immigrants from other countries, like India and China. They didn’t
start rich; they hustled their way into success. They work their assess off,
they save money, and they push their kids to be disciplined like them, which
is why they end up so successful later in life. Takeaway:
The key is discipline and hustle. Everything else is secondary. Get out
there!

Personal identity and trauma

FRAME 1: I’m special and the world out there is hostile to people
like me. They don’t see my value, and my strengths, and they don’t
acknowledge how I’m different. As a result of my differences, I’ve
experienced so much trauma growing up, being constantly challenged by
so-called normal people around me who were trying to make me like them. And
that trauma is now the reason I’m unable to succeed like normal people.
Takeaway:
Why won’t people acknowledge my differences and my trauma? Why try if the
world hates people like me?

FRAME 2: It’s not about me. It’s about what I can offer the world.
There are people out there truly suffering, with no food to eat. I’m
different than others, but that’s not what matters. What matters is what I
can offer. What I can give. What I can create. Being special is a superpower
that I can use to use to change the world. Takeaway:
I’ve gone through some stuff, but it’s not about me and my differences;
it’s about what I can do to improve the planet.

How much control we have in our lives

FRAME 1: Things are so much bigger than any of us. The world is evil
and I can’t help that. The rich are powerful and I can’t help that. Some
people are lucky and I’m not one of those people. Those are the people who
get everything, and people like me get screwed. It’s always been the case,
and it always will.
Takeaway: There are only two kinds of people: the successful and the
unsuccessful, and it’s not up to us to decide which we are. And I’m
clearly not one of the winners.

FRAME 2: There’s no such thing as destiny. We make our own. When I
fail, that’s on me. I can shape my surroundings. I can change my conditions.
I’m in control. It’s up to me to put myself in the positions where I can get
lucky. Discipline powers luck. I will succeed because I refuse not to.
Takeaway: If I’m not in the position I want to be in, that’s on me to
work harder until I am.

The practical power of different frames

Importantly, most frames aren’t absolutely true or false.

Many frames can appear to contradict each other but be
simultaneously true—or at least partially—depending on the situation
or how you look at it.

FRAME 1 (Blame)

This wasn’t my fault. I got screwed by the flight being delayed!

FRAME 2 (Responsibility)

This is still on me. I know delays happen a lot here, and I should have
planned better and accounted for that.

Both of these are kind of true. Neither is actual reality. They’re
the ways we choose to interpret reality. There are infinite possible
frames to choose from—not just an arbitrary two.

And the word “choose” is really important there, because we have options. We
all can—and do—choose between a thousand different versions of FRAME 1 (I’m
screwed so why bother), and FRAME 2 (I choose to behave as if I’m empowered
and disciplined) every day.

This is why you can have Chinedu, a 14-year-old kid from Lagos with the
worst life in the world (parents killed, attacked by militias, lost friends
in wartime, etc.), but he lights up any room he walks into with his smile.
He’s endlessly positive, and he goes on to start multiple businesses, a
thriving family, and have a wonderful life.

Meanwhile, Brittany in Los Angeles grows up with most everything she could
imagine, but she lives in social media and is constantly comparing her
mansion to other people’s mansions. She sees there are prettier girls out
there. With more friends. And bigger houses. And so she’s suicidal and on
all sorts of medications.

❝

Frames are lenses, and lenses change reality.

This isn’t a judgment of Brittany. At some level, her life is objectively
worse than Chinedu’s. Hook them up to some emotion-detecting-MRI or whatever
and I’m sure you’ll see more suffering in her brain, and more happiness in
his. Objectively.

What I’m saying—and the point of this entire model—is that the quality of
our respective lives might be more a matter of framing than of actual
circumstance.

But this isn’t just about extremes like Chinedu and Brittany. It applies to
the entire spectrum between war-torn Myanmar and Atherton High. It applies
to all of us.

We get to choose our frame. And our frame is our reality.

The framing divergence

So here’s where it gets interesting for society, and specifically for
politics.

Our frames are massively diverging.

I think this—more than anything—explains how you can have such completely
isolated pockets of people in a place like the SF Bay Area. Or in the US in
general.

I have started to notice two distinct groups of people online and in person.
There are many others, of course, but these two stand out.

GROUP 1: Listen to somewhat similar podcasts I do, have read over
20 non-fiction books in the last year, are relatively thin, are
relatively active, they see the economy as booming, they’re working in
tech or starting a business, and they’re 1000% bouncing with energy.
They hardly watch much TV, if any, and hardly play any video games. If
they have kids they’re in a million different activities, sports, etc,
and the conversation is all about where they’ll go to college and what
they’ll likely do as a career. They see politics as horribly broken, are
probably center-right, seem to be leaning more religious lately, and
generally are optimistic about the future.
Energy and Outlook: Disciplined, driven, positive, and productive.
GROUP 2: They see the podcasts GROUP 1 listens to as a bunch of
tech bros doing evil capitalist things. They’re very unhealthy. Not
active at all. Low energy. Constantly tired. They spend most of their
time watching TV and playing video games. They think the US is racist
and sexist and ruined. If they have kids they aren’t doing many
activities and are quite withdrawn, often with a focus on their personal
issues and how those are causing trauma in their lives. Their view of
politics is 100% focused on the extreme right and how evil they are,
personified by Trump, and how the world is just going to hell.
Energy and Outlook: Undisciplined, moping, negative, and
unproductive.

I see a million variations of these, and my friends and I are hybrids as
well, but these seem like poles on some kind of spectrum.

But thing that gets me is how different they are. And now imagine
that for the entire country. But with far more frames
and—therefore—subcultures.

These lenses shape and color everything. They shape how you hear the news.
They shape the media you consume. Which in turn shapes the lenses again.

This is so critical because they also determine who you hang out with, what
you watch and listen to, and, therefore, how your perspectives are
reinforced and updated. Repeat. ♻️

A couple of books

Two books that this makes me think of are
Bobos in Paradise, by David Brooks, and
Bowling Alone,
by Robert Putman.

They both highlight, in different ways, how groups are separating in the US,
and how subgroups shoot off from what used to be the mainstream and become
something else.

❝

When our frames our different, our realities are different.

That’s a key point in both books, actually: America used to largely be one
group. The same cars. The same neighborhoods. The same washing machines. The
same newspapers.

Most importantly, the same frames.

There were different religions and different preferences for things, but
we largely interpreted reality the same way.

Here are some very rough examples of shared frames in—say—the 20th
century in the United States:

America is one of the best countries in the world
I’m proud to be American
You can get ahead if you work hard
Equality isn’t perfect, but it’s improving
I generally trust and respect my neighbors
The future is bright
Things are going to be ok

Those are huge frames to agree on. And if you look at those I’ve laid
out above, you can see how different they are.

Ok, what does that mean for us?

I’m not sure what it means, other than divergence. Pockets. Subgroups. With
vastly different perspectives and associated outcomes.

I imagine this will make it more difficult to find consensus in politics.

✅

I imagine it’ll mean more internal strife.

✅

Less trust of our neighbors. More cynicism.

✅

And so on.

But to me, the most interesting about it is just understanding the
dynamic and using that understanding to ask ourselves what we can do about
it.

Summary

Frames are lenses, not reality.
Some lenses are more positive and productive than others.
We can choose which frames to use, and those might shape our reality
more than our actual circumstances.
Changing frames can, therefore, change our outcomes.
When it comes to social dynamics and politics, lenses determine our
experienced reality.
If we don’t share lenses, we don’t share reality.
Maybe it’s time to pick and champion some positive shared lenses.

Recommendations

Here are my early thoughts on recommendations, having just started exploring
the model.

Identify your frames. They are like the voices you use to talk to
yourself, and you should be very careful about those.
Look at the frames of the people around you. Talk to them and
figure out what frames they’re using. Think about the frames people have
that you look up to vs. those you don’t.
Consider changing your frames to better ones. Remember that
frames aren’t reality. They’re useful or harmful ways of interpreting
reality. Choose yours carefully.
When you disagree with someone, think about your respective
understandings of reality. Adjust the conversation accordingly. Odds are you might think the
same as them if you saw reality the way they do, and vice versa.