#peter principle

[smugaltruist]

This is how I predict Trump’s cabinet will act when he inevitably keels over. Living evidence of the Peter Principle: A bunch of incompetent fucks promoted above their abilities.

Speaking about Death Of Stalin, I’d love if Trump, Musk and Putin died on Stalin’s death day. That would be incredible. Like what happened to Thomas Jefferson and John Adams.

[mymelodic-chapel]

Isolation Ward- Point Final [Compilation] (Coldwave, Post-Punk) Recorded: 1981-1984 Released: Nov 16, 2009 [LTM Recordings] Producer(s): Gilles Martin, Peter Principle

[jt1674]

[filmcentury]

In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.

Laurence J. Peter (1919 – 1990), Canadian educator and management theorist, most famous for having formulated the Peter Principle, in The Peter Principle (1969) [This quote is a statement of the Peter Principle.]

[bodyofbrilliance]

✨ View the full poem on my blog: The Peter Principle: Understand Why Employees Fail to Succeed Poem 💛

[murshili-ii]

The Peter Principle and the Superstition of Excellence

I believe the phenomenon whereby people who excel in a working-level job are promoted to management, which is a different job they are not qualified to do, has been termed the Peter Principle; promotion beyond competence.

The failures of a system are always much more informative than its successes.

The Peter Principle is a rare slip-up that exposes the hidden underlying mechanics of our society; and in this case, it makes it unmistakably clear that our social philosophy views leadership as a privilege.

It clearly demonstrates that, despite any rhetoric to the contrary, we consider positions of leadership "better", and reserve them for the "deserving", who have "earned" them by exhibiting "excellence".

It's a rank system; and we place the "higher" ranks unequivocally above the "lower" ranks, which consist of "lesser" people who "deserve" to be trodden upon.

In other words, which role we put a person in has nothing to do with how good they are at performing that role; it only has to do with how "high" the role is, and how "high" a person stands in the hierarchy.

This is feudalist reasoning. It's an artifact left over from the European Middle Ages, when we thought some people were simply better, all around, than other people; and we thought that "greatness" and "goodness" and "worth" were objective natural quantities that existed in the universe long before humans discovered them, rather than volatile and inconsistent manmade concepts generated by human beholders.

It's a superstitious logic. It only makes sense under the presumption that the universe itself inherently cares what a person deserves, and will ensure that deserving people enjoy all possible blessings as a reward for their excellence.

It treats all of life as one long trial by ordeal.

Like most superstitions, the superstition of excellence relies on a heuristic simplification; namely, the notion that "excellence" is a single quantity on a linear scale, and that all possible and conceivable forms of excellence co-occur in the same people.

This is pure superstition. It's the same as the notion that one medicine is so "healthy" that it can treat all diseases. It's obviously false, as we've known for centuries.

It is every bit as superstitious as a gambler concluding that since they've been lucky so far, they're likely to keep being lucky.

The Peter Principle also demonstrates why this feudalistic logic fails: It elevates people who are good at any one specific thing into positions of responsibility over many things they aren't good at, while also ensuring that leadership will not be held by people who are good at leadership.

The solution is obvious: We need to stop moralizing the pragmatic; we need to abandon and denounce the superstition of hierarchy and excellence; we need to start viewing all roles as separate and specific roles, not arranged in a linear vertical order; and we need to put people into those roles on the basis of their specific capabilities in those particular roles, and on no other basis.

We should do this throughout society. Our whole society would be the better for it.

The pragmatic ability to obtain and retain power, wealth, or fame is irrelevant to the moral ability to use those resources well, or to deserve them. To believe they have any relation is superstition.

"Meritocracy" should refer to when people are put into roles for their capabilities in those roles, not for their capabilities in anything, in general.

Universally uproot the Peter Phenomenon to create a better world.

[portiaadams]

Tumblr is the Peter principle in weird website form

You gotta love that Tumblr is on the rise because of Twitter and Reddit going down, and not because Tumblr has actually done anything to really improve its website.

I personally kin with a website that accidentally and coincidentally fails upwards.

The site that wins simply by remaining upright.

We are literally this meme, posted eons ago, in our ancient texts.

[spideypoolsupremacythesecond]

I maybe managed to lose my main blog who in the good old days was called spideypool supremacy. Let's not worry about the details

LET'S NOT WORRY ABOUT THE DETAILS

[jonna-thure-agnes]

Tuxedomoon - In A Manner Of Speaking

[ileolai]

heaven doesnt know the details of how crowley has helped aziraphale, so from their perspective, aziraphale is this unfathomably powerful being who can survive hellfire and perform unprecedented miracles. they want him on their side bc they think there’s no way they’re going to get shit done otherwise

which is actually so funny. dude can barely handle talking to his own neighbours bc of his anxiety. he refuses to go to a meeting unless he can bring a chandelier and everyone dances. he barely knows how to ask his best friend of ~6000 years to move in. they put that guy in charge. lmfao

[bogkeep]

"whew that was a very intense test/exam, i should get a little treat"

-> "yay i passed the test! i should get a little treat reward!"

-> "oh no i failed the test, i need a little pick me up treat..." -> i must redo the test. REPEAT TREAT CYCLE

see it's all very strategic. this way i get more treat opportunities per treat event

[lost-coder]

The Zen of Python

Beautiful is better than ugly.

Explicit is better than implicit.

Simple is better than complex.

Complex is better than complicated.

Flat is better than nested.

Sparse is better than dense.

Readability counts.

Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.

Although practicality beats purity.

Errors should never pass silently.

Unless explicitly silenced.

In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.

There should be one—and preferably only one—obvious way to do it.

Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch.

Now is better than never.

Although never is often better than *right* now.

If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.

If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea.

Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!

[dylanpizzapie]

When I said physically abused, I didn’t mean kicking and punching, I meant his parents throwing spells and curses at him.

[utilitycaster]

honestly there is little in the TTRPG/Actual Play world so predictably dull and annoying as people who are just deeply bitter that their favorite game isn't more popular (or relatedly that channels that have long used D&D continue to use D&D). idk man go pitch something to an indie channel. if I only hear about your favorite game when you angrily comment under more popular people's tweets i'm going to assume it sucks as much as you do. sorry you see actual play not as a storytelling format but rather as an advertisement or opportunity to Convert The Faithless I guess.

[earlgraytay]

I'm constantly fascinated by Sayers' worldview because in a lot of very important ways it's a lot closer to mine than most other authors, of her time or since

and in a lot of very important ways it's wildly different, and those differences are mostly Products Of Her Time