zScore

There exists a particular axis of success, a unidimensional compression encapsulating the fundamental tensions of biological self-interest versus productive output uplifting society. 

Put differently, there is a Pareto optimal curve demarcating the altruist's best possible impact within capitalism, or the capitalist's best opportunity for maximal altruism, at any particular point in time.

This is a novel extension of humankind's idea space. It deserves a new and precise term. It's kind of like self-actualization but much more specific. Knowing our number helps us better orient our goals and actions.

I'm calling it "zScore".

You can self-score, or I can score you. Because I'm coining it, for now I trust my numbers most. We update through reasoned discussion and hopefully converge together.

It is impossible to know and understand fully at present because human culture has not yet evolved to value this. In nearly all of our brief lives, we meander with varying definitions for success. We return to ancient—seemingly timeless—wisdoms for self improvement.

Every individual is different, each with their own strengths and weaknesses, enneagrams and experiences. So people with the same zScore might get there very differently and chart divergent but equally valid paths forward in their lives.

But because we rightly ascribe equal intrinsic value to every human on moral grounds, we mistakenly allow overmuch epistemic breathing room. Each person always subjectively wins their own debate, to define their own biased view on this particular field of objective endeavor within society's network.

Almost everybody on the planet is straight-up wrong.

We could argue about a time discount factor for future human lives. We could argue about activity A versus activity B. We even do, a bit, when a friend considers moving towns or changing jobs. Such arguments are quite productive and fun because they attempt via pros/cons lists to measure and balance the right things.

But until we die, even the smartest among us lack clarity. We think in heuristics without producing a definitive integer solution, which then impedes effective argumentation. Living is merely performed, without deep intent.

Mid-life crises are symptoms of severe misorientations. When subjective perception clashes with a different reality we failed to mentally model, eventually the shift we make in our behavior to approximate a better path forward is accompanied by half an insight.

But just as we didn't have the verb "to google" until that company demonstrated overwhelming superiority in navigating the web, we simply do not have the terminology yet to express certain ideas. Those who best intuit zScore or build their own closely related frameworks have used it to enormous effect, generating unfathomable wealth and influence. They have discovered how to "google for success and self-actualization" in life.

People naturally react to the exceptional ones by questioning what makes them so superior. How can they merit their seemingly disproportionate share of resources? Without proper terms or definitions, and with only a basic common view of hardship tolerance as somehow virtuous, we are incapable of determining any exact proportions.

Tragically, these incredible individuals end up intellectually isolated. Without shared language, they build their own worlds. To varying degrees, they live under constant attack from without. So they require constant self-reassurance from within. Plus extra to fight their own logical Bayesian self-doubts while unavoidably observing all those others.

We are all default disposed, subconsciously and programmatically, to the clearest anchor everyone else points to. In the end, for most of us, it seems our only real option. So we move forward with intentionality and fool ourselves thinking we have some semblance of internal resolve.

Harvard was the preeminent place for "higher learning" since the 1600s. In 2005, for the first time since America was created, a new and hyper-focused institution arose to dominate all universities. (Simultaneously, Peter Singer reached a resonant internet long tail to spark "Effective Altruism" as a religion for the rational.)

Y Combinator beats colleges at their own alleged game of providing intellectual nourishment to fuel students seeking their life's fulfillment. They only admit students with a zScore of 6 or above, but they do not livestream their interviews or waste time explaining themselves properly to the world at large. 

This would indeed be futile because you need a zScore of at least 5 to even understand the concept without reactively condemning it as morally wrong. The vast majority of people, probably well above 99%, have a zScore of 2-4. 

Once one attains a zScore of 4 it is easy and perhaps reasonable to stop advancing. One has economic abundance and may elect to prioritize such unscalable activities as "raising children" because it feels meaningful—personal satisfaction and joyous love being wonderful experiences to compound.

These are simply different axes, orthogonal or skew to zScore's. Viewed from the zScore basis, journeying on those other axes looks like complacency. This is not necessarily bad, just naturally misaligned from the other frame of reference.

When this misalignment is not intentional, one will constantly struggle.

In the Future of Loving Grace, computer systems will one day help every single human go from 0 to 3 with ease. Then if an individual so desires, they may unblock themself to get to 4.

Biological humans can get up to level 15. To my present understanding, I'm a mere 5. I suspect I may be jumping to level 9 by publishing and executing this project, which has unlocked many new perspectives and opportunities for me.

I'm excited to share more on this topic with the world. We all deserve a database of everyone's scores over time. Prediction markets or other mechanisms to measure and feed back zScore's true value would be incredible to see. If I'm correct in my newfound modeling, I may get to level 13 by virtue of this single idea alone, starting with this essay and its resultant impact on the trajectory of history.

Today and forever forward, conscious beings from this blue dot are free to learn, study, and play more fully with the substrate of meaning. The burdens of everyday biological living need not confuse nor encumber us for much longer.

Once you fully see what I'm trying to communicate, freely and generously, I hope you will consider joining me in Zaltiva.